University of Leipzig Suppressed Climate-Critical Seminar

The fundamental human right of scientific freedom gets trampled on in Germany. European Institute for Climate and Energy (EIKE) Vice President Michael Limburg was denied making a climate science-critical speech at the University of Leipzig.  Are we slipping back into the science Dark Ages in Europe?Press Release from EIKE:

“University of Leipzig censors critical climate conference*. Fundamental freedom of science gets trampled.
Blatant censorship of dissenting scientific opinions on the subject of climate change and its causes is the post-modern trend. After recent attempts to ban the scientifically undesirable paper by renown scientists Spencer & Braswell (details here) and the ban of the climate-critical conference at the Belgian Society of European Engineers and Industrialists (SEII) by IPCC Vice Chair Prof. J. van Ypersele (details here), the Faculty for Physics and Geosciences of the University of Leipzig is the next to suppress open scientific debate. University of Leipzig Dean Prof. Dr. Jürgen Haase Tuesday barred a climate seminar organized by geography professor Werner Kirstein, as wells as the use of the University auditorium and participation by European Institute for Climate and Energy (EIKE) Vice President Michael Limburg as the main speaker.Fortunately the ban was later relaxed and the seminar was allowed to go ahead.

The reason for originally having banned the seminar was a dissertation authored by Michael Limburg, which was critical of climate-science and was submitted to the faculty in March 2010. Two reviewers rejected the dissertation claiming, among other points, that it was inadequate. This is why Limburg was not welcome as a speaker, according to a letter from the Dean. The fact that the same dissertation had been recommended for acceptance by 4 other renowned professors went unmentioned by Haase. Limburg immediately challenged the ban.

What was so inconvenient about Limburg’s dissertation?

Under the supervision of Prof. Werner Kirstein, Limburg had written a dissertation that examined the quality of historical global temperature and sea level data in detail. His conclusions were damning. Using accepted rules for science and measurement, Limburg’s results showed that the datasets did not allow sea level and temperature change over the last 120-150 years to be determined anywhere near the alleged accuracies of millimetres or tenths of a degree Celsius respectively as claimed by the IPCC. The range of uncertainty, in both global mean temperature and sea level, is considerably greater than the total respective changes given by the IPCC. Every factor in attributing the possible causes of the changes was, at best, scientifically questionable.

Naturally, the faculty searched – and found – the “right” reviewers for assessing Limburg’s dissertation. In his decision to ban Limburg from speaking, Haase quoted only the objectively unfair and negative assessments. The fact that four other university professors had recommended the dissertation be accepted got no mention by Haase. Limburg officially contested the assessment delivered by the two reviewers, but they have taken their time to respond. Up to today there is still no response. Now a legal battle appears inevitable. Science has again been cast aside.

The high point of the whole affair is the open attempt by the University of Leipzig to silence Lim¬burg – even though he had been officially invited by a full professor. The Leipzig University faculty appears to be completely oblivious to this unworthy conduct.

Open debate is essential for the progress of science

This brings up Voltaire, the most famous philosopher of our time, and his words to his harshest opponent: ‘Sir, I do not agree with your opinion and I fully oppose you. But I would give up my life to assure that you will always be allowed to publicly express your opinion’. At the University of Leipzig, there has to be some colleagues among the philosophy faculty who are familiar with those words. But it looks as if the University leadership is not among them.”

Editor, EIKE

*2nd Climate Seminar – Climate Change in the Non-Public Perception
Thursday, 8 September 2011, 2 p.m, Duration: 3 hours. Location: University of Leipzig – Auditorium: Geographie, Talstraße 35

11 responses to “University of Leipzig Suppressed Climate-Critical Seminar”

  1. mindert eiting

    Let’s hope there is a scientist, historian, or philosopher, who keeps track of these facts and will write a concise book of 300 pages. This may become an obligatory part of all science educations to teach young students what science is not.

    1. Ulrich Elkmann

      I suggest he or she take this as a model for it:
      Zhores A. Medvedev, The Rise and Fall of T.D.Lysenko (Columbia University Press, 1969) [304 pp.]
      It should also serve as a reminder that AGW was not the greatest swindle commited in the name of science (but the largest foisted on the free world), nor the most harmful (but they’re working on that).

  2. R. de Haan

    They have “the wall” back all right.

    This time they can keep it.

  3. DirkH
  4. DirkH

    Ban Ki-Moon, Aral sea quote, 12 hours ago

    Blunder of epic proportions. He REALLY uses the Aral sea as a climate change example. What a dolt!

  5. Rich


    And Kiribati is getting bigger:

    Can the guy at the head of the UN really be so uninformed?

  6. R. de Haan


    “Can this guy at the head of the UN really be so uninformed”

    This guy has an agenda.

    Agenda 21 of the United Nations and

    The short description is “World Government” which requires the destruction of the West.

    And we are paying these ass holes.

  7. R. de Haan

    The reality:

    Dalton, Maunder, Bueller anyone?

    1. NeilM

      Hmmm… Is that what they call a sticky web site? 😉

  8. Ulrich Elkmann

    “What a dolt…” Let’s see:
    – Trygve Lie (1946-52)
    – Dag Hammarskjöld (1953-61)
    – U Thant (1961-71)
    – Kurt Waldheim (1972-81)
    – Javier Pérez de Cuéllar (1982-191)
    – Boutros Boutros-Ghali (1992-96)
    – Kofi Annan (1997-2006)
    – Ban Ki-moon (2007ff.)
    Being a dolt is part of the job description. (Or if you prefer: the way the UN is set up ensures that it might as well be.)

  9. MostlyHarmless

    I see Ban Ki-moon is wittering on about rising sea level around Kiribati. I’ve just checked recent data from the South Pacific Sea Level and Climate Monitoring Project (at Australia’s BOM).

    While there’s been an overall rise of 2.8 mm/yr since 1993 (much influenced by the sharp drop during the 1998 El Nino), there’s been a downward trend since 2002 of -5.48 mm/yr, so Kiribati must be growing steadily in area. So much for hype unsupported by any data -par for the course for alarmists like Moon of course.

    Solomon Islands – no trend since 1999 (after recovery from the 1998 drop). Tuvalu – small downward trend of -0.8 mm/yr since 1999. Vanuatu – upward trend continuing, but current level not much above the 1997 level .

    I plan to review the data for the Pacific islands once I’ve finished my Australia review – analysis of the modern 15 ABSLP stations almost complete, currently attending to presentation and final “polishing”. The complete review will take a few weeks more. I’ll post my first part in the next few days.

    Pierre – I’ll post details on your contact page. I hope you’ll find part one interesting, but part two will cover stations with a longer history, and should reveal some surprises for those “down under”.

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this. More information at our Data Privacy Policy