Climate Change Debate: A Famous Scientist Becomes a Skeptic

Spiegel Online ^ | May 12, 2014 | Axel Bojanowski

[rottndog]

The debate over climate change is often a contentious one, and key players in the discussion only rarely switch sides. But late last month, Lennart Bengtsson, the former director of the Hamburg-based Max Planck Institute for Meteorology, one of the world's leading climate research centers, announced he would join the academic advisory council of the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF).

GWPF, based in Britain, is a non-profit organization and self-described think tank. Conservative politician Nigel Lawson founded the organization in 2009 in order to counteract what he considered to be an exaggerated concern about global warming. The organization uses aggressive information campaigns to pursue its goals. The lobby group's views markedly differ from those of the UN climate panel, the IPCC, whose reports are the products of the work of hundreds of scientists who classify and analyze vast amounts of climate knowledge accumulated through years of research. The most recent IPCC report states that man-made emissions of greenhouse gases are leading to significant global warming, with serious environmental consequences.

Bengtsson was known for maintaining moderate positions even during the most vitriolic debates over global warming during the 1990s. In an interview with SPIEGEL ONLINE, he discusses why he made the shift to the skeptics' camp.

[rottndog]

Swedish meteorologist Lennart Bengtsson, born in 1935, served as director of the European Center for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts in England from 1981 to 1990 and then as director of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology in Hamburg, one of the world's leading climate research centers. Since his retirement in 2000, he has worked as a professor at the University of Reading in Britain. Bengtsson has been the recipient of numerous awards including the prestigious German Environmental Prize bestowed by the German Federal Environmental Foundation (DBU). His work is focused largely on climate modelling and weather.

Obviously, he's been bought off by big oil....

[rottndog]

Key point from the article:

Bengtsson: I have not changed my view on a fundamental level. I have never seen myself as an alarmist but rather as a scientist with a critical viewpoint, and in that sense I have always been a skeptic. I have devoted most of my career to developing models for predicting the weather, and in doing so I have learned the importance of validating forecasts against observed weather. As a result, that's an approach I strongly favor for "climate predictions." It's essential to validate model results, especially when dealing with complex systems such as the climate. It's essential do so properly if such predictions are to be considered credible.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: You think there's a need for climate research to do some catching up in this regard?

Bengtsson: It is frustrating that climate science is not able to validate their simulations correctly. Since the end of the 20th century, the warming of the Earth has been much weaker than what climate models show.

[C210N]

Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF).

I hope any studies to be produced by this foundation get GlowBull warming funding and grants. After all, the foundation itself was formed due to GlowBull warming.

[Beowulf9]

http://www.nbcnews.com/science/environment/get-reality-check-antarctic-meltdown-rising-sea-level-n104616

[Fishing-guy]

Earth’s temperature has gone through cycles of changes, and it will continue to do so. The only question is do humans contribute anything to the current warming trend?

[JimSEA]

Ask some geologists about current theories. They will tell you that climate stability is an illusion aided by our short lifespans and impatience. We are still at historic lows re. CO2 and have a long ways to go before we even approach the normal, pre Himalayan levels (as if anything is normal in earth history).

[Mrs. Don-o]

Love these skeptics.

[Fishing-guy]

“Pre Himalayan levels.” Is that when dinosaurs return? LOL

[5th MEB]

The answer to that question can be answered by looking up into the sky at about 2pm on a sunny day, it’s that huge glowing ball of burning gas in the sky.

[rottndog]

Here's a good link with a conglomeration of articles showing the failure of climate models:

97% of climate models say that 97% of climate scientists are wrong

[JimSEA]

More likely, those mountains are a huge carbon sink.

[COBOL2Java]

"Heretic! Non-believer!"

[SADMILLIE]

We all know it is not real. It is ploy to dumb down this country for the “good of all mankind”. Resist it ,crush it like a bug. Vomit out environmentalists,

[3boysdad]

The real question that no one asks, and can’t be answered either, is what exactly should the Earth’s climate be?

[Magic Fingers]

Very good.

[1010RD]

His so old he’ll be dead soon. Are there any young, honest scientists?

[Grams A]

Well, it’s mid-May and 57 degrees in Houston suburbs. I may contribute to warming tonight by turning my fireplace on.

[1010RD]

That’s a great question and one you could ask them about all kinds of environmental questions. All Leftist responses to the environment are status quo. No change, ever... once they’re cozy in their villa.

[Billthedrill]

Huh. Who asks scientists about science anymore, now that we have politicians and actors and rock stars?

[Zeneta]

His so old he’ll be dead soon. Are there any young, honest scientists?

---

Death bed skeptics have historically been denied thoughtful consideration.