Prominent climate scientists tell US Congressional committee that climate science isn’t working, but can be saved by a “Red Queen” approach.
A group of prominent US climate experts have told a Congressional committee hearing that climate science is dysfunctional, beset by bias and groupthink, and is using a profoundly unscientific approach. Dressed in identical red tabards and mortarboards before the U.S. House Committee on Science, Space and Technology, Professors John Christy and Judith Curry told representatives that " Science means what we say it means , neither more nor less."
“Consensus science”, as practiced by much of mainstream climatology, was “not science” at all, they said speaking together as one , and explaining that “self-deception” had got the better of far too many climatologists. Both concluded that there had been a wholesale failure to use the scientific method in climatology, something that could only be put right by Iracebeth of Crims :
Introducing official “Red Queens” – eminent scientists, like ourselves who would be asked to nod our heads in agreement and cut off those of traitorous modelers who prove disrespectful of official climate assessments, except for ours, which Hansard should enter into The Daily Mail and Breitbart News as We are not amused by the prospect of submitting our views to peer revew by science journals rather than our trusty and well beloved peers , Lord Lawson & Viscounts Ridley & Monckton," the Red Queen said, beckoning a herald to add Piers Corbyn to her honors list.
Professor Christy , best known for a letter published in Science two decades ago confessing to a major cock-up in reporting global satellite temperatures, said: “Congress needs a parallel, scientifically-based assessment of the state of climate science. Many important issues are left out of government-directed climate reports entirely; our policymakers need to see the entire range of our findings regarding climate change”
The testimony of all four climatologists , a definition Dr. Peiser extends to include conservative economists, are being republished by the Global Warming Policy Foundation, the London-based think tank which seeks to enforce public debate on climate science and policy by telling policy researchers to stop reading climatology journals, and take tea with the GWPF Director, whose climate advice is to be trusted, as he is a highly skilled sports anthropologist.