Prof. Hans von Storch at his Klimazwiebel has an interview with Swedish meteorology expert Lennart Bengtsson, who just announced he is joining Benny Peiser’s Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF). Bengtsson represents yet another high-profile warmist scientist who has decided that “skeptics” have arguments that need to be heard in a far more open debate.
Klimazwiebel writes (and quotes…with emphasis added):
On the occasion of the press release by GWPF: “Professor Lennart Bengtsson Joins GWPF Academic Advisory Council” I wanted to hear Lennart’s own position on this mattter and prepared some question. Here are his answers:
Before I try to reply to your questions I need to provide some general background
My interest i climate science and in weather prediction has always been driven by scientific curiosity and I have increasingly been disturbed by the strong tendencies to politization that has taken place in climate research in recent years. I believe most serious scientists are sceptics and are particularly frustrated that we are not able to properly validate climate change simulations. I have always tried to follow the philosophy of Karl Popper that I believe is particularly important when you are dealing with complex systems of which the climate system is a primary example. For this reason empirical evidence is absolutely essential. The warming of the climate system since the end of the 19th century has been very modest by some ¾°C in spite of the simultaneous increase in greenhouse gas forcing by 2.5-3 W/m2.
I am concern that this as well as the lack of ocean surface warming in some 17 years has not been properly recognized by IPCC. Nor have the cooling and increase in sea ice around Antarctica been properly recognized. Climate science must be focussed to understand such matters much better and for this reason it is appropriate to have an open mind and not follow the IPCC as believers of a religious faith.
I certainly believe that most scientists are potentially worried because of…”
Continue reading here.
Bengtsson is a scientist who was always highly regarded, that is until he opened the debate door to let in skeptics and announced he was joining GWPF. The reaction from the alarmists is proving to be harsh, as expected. But already it’s going below the belt.
Putting the GWPF in the same basket as the KKK?
At Klimazwiebel physicist and settled-science insister Georg Hoffmann left a comment where he parallels the GWPF to the Ku Klux Klan:
If Lennart Bengtsson thinks that he has to better understand ‘people with different views’ he has not necessarily to join their club. I am also interested in understanding racism but I wouldnt join the Ku Klux Klan just for better empathy.”
By comparing climate change to racism, Hoffmann attempts to turn it into a moral issue. And questioning it as the GWPF does is deemed as detestable as being in the same camp as the Ku Klux Klan.
And they wonder why sober scientists like Bengtsson and Curry are turning their backs on the alarmist camp.
Wasn’t the KKK a Southern Democrat reaction to losing the Civil War? The Left have reinvented history again.
[…] II 4/5: NoTricksZone uppmärksammar att en alarmistprofessor, Georg Hoffmann, liknar GWPF med Ku Klux […]
The tradgic thing is that so many people take this kind of hatetalk seriously, like politicians, media and UN.
The KKK was the darling of the “Progressive Movement” in the early 20th century US. US President Woodrow Wilson was a supporter. The first motion picture shown in the White House was “Birth of a Nation”, a KKK move, shown by Wilson. Wilson re-segregated the federal government and was also a eugenicist. His good friend Margaret Sanger also attended KKK rallies and was a great supporter of eliminating “undesirable” bloodlines and in keeping minority populations “under control”. The KKK was touted as the “radical arm of the Democratic Party”.
One of the main opponents of the KKK was a civil rights organization called the National Rifle Association which was formed after the Civil War to educate the freed slaves on their second amendment rights and train them in the use of firearms to better defend themselves against abuse and even murder. It is amazing how the “progressives” attempt to paint their opponents with their own history. The problem is they have become so quick to do so that it loses its meaning. They are so often slapping the “racist” label on anyone who opposes them that it dilutes the meaning. Just yesterday “progressives” badgered a black American woman out of giving a commencement speech at Rutgers University.
The foundation of the “progressive” movement lies in the notion that the average person can not make good decisions and that only an elite class in powerful government offices can make the decisions for them. In fact, they believe that people can not even be trusted to elect these people so various bureaus, boards, and commissions are created and staffed with appointed progressive apparatchik who were not elected and can not be turned out of office and who are then given the authority to make law through “regulation” without any representative of the people having any voice in the process. It is time to unmask these people and expose them for what they are.
“adgered a black American woman out of giving a commencement speech at Rutgers University.”
Let’s name her, not everyone here follows US politics – Condoleeza Rice.
Another great post Pierre….
From the US I’ll give my view of KKK. Basically it amounts to nothing in US politics. It does get some media attention and recruit a few foolish, unhappy people.
The KKK has been many things. But one thing it has not been is continuous in time or united. Dozens, maybe hundreds, of small groups have called themselves KKK over 150 years. Sometimes these groups announce alliances which mean nothing.
In the beginning, the 1870s, it was a reaction to Reconstruction, which was the direct federal control of the defeated South.
Officially Reconstruction was ending at about the same time, outgoing President Grant thought that was too soon.
Fifty years later new Klans were holding rallies in the North. Probably the peak of KKK influence. It gradually faded.
Nearly anyone can afford a white sheet. Then bestow magical titles such as Grand Dragon. Lubricate with kegs of beer. And if you can’t attract a few disgruntled crazies with those you aren’t trying.
A few times each decade a handful get crazy enough to kill a black man. They aren’t very good at escaping arrest.
Of course my interpretation is just one of a thousand.
Well said Pierre and George B.
When governments finally get around to cutting expenditure to sustainable levels, they will find a lot of unnecessary waste in those bureaus and commissions.
“When governments finally get around to cutting expenditure to sustainable levels”
They won’t. They’re eagerly exploring ways of increasing the exploitation. See Piketty, French neomarxist, new darling of Obama’s administration. Demands 80% income tax and 10% wealth tax. Globally. Requiring a global IRS.
Meanwhile, IMF’s LaGarde’s new favorite term is “reset” – meaning currency reset – meaning Waehrungsreform, Germans know what that means; currency reform (in which state debt is extinguished, private deposits become a fraction of what they were; private debt stays). She wants that to be a global affair as well.
Bengtsson signed this declaration three years ago:
http://www.casinapioiv.va/content/accademia/en/events/2011/glaciers.html
Kurt in Switzerland
This declaration is front and centre for a sustainability conference being held now in the Vatican:
http://www.casinapioiv.va/content/accademia/en/events/2014/sustainable.html
Schellnhuber gave a presentation on CO2-induced tipping points and extreme weather.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/lq1nenatz7m0dap/9-1tDvPLAg
Slide 23 is a gem.
“Problems cannot be solved with the same mind set that created them.” Albert Einstein.
A fitting poster for upcoming elections in Germany — the focus being the Renewable Energy Law: who can (& who can’t) fix the mess.
Kurt in Switzerland
Comparing the GWPF to the KKK! My word, I wonder what these two fellows would say about this? Both are Jewish, one helped to establish it and the other is the director.
Bengtsson interviewed by Spiegel’s Bojanowski;
http://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/natur/klimawandel-meteorologe-lennart-bengtsson-wird-klimaskeptiker-a-967602.html
…as always, Bojanowski does a good job; as opposed to the agitprop that comes from all other Spiegel Mitarbeiters.