Will Alexander on the suppression of science by the AGW clergy

“Together with my colleagues, research assistants and students we are now able to demonstrate with a high degree of statistical assurance (95% in many cases) that the annual river flows, rainfall and other hydro-meteorological data exhibit predictable, concurrent, above and below average multi-year sequences. More importantly, we can demonstrate that these multi-year properties are directly related to variations in the receipt and poleward redistribution of solar energy via the global oceanic and atmospheric processes. We were unable to detect any trends or other anomalies in the data that could be ascribed to human activities.

Now my question. Given this readily available information is it not obvious that the fundamental error in climate change science, including the ability to predict regional climatic variations years ahead, is the clear rejection by climate change scientists of the obvious solar energy related processes that drive global climate?  …

There is another issue of major international concern. In the 1970s there was a wealth of international research in this field. I attended discussions and symposia in the UK, Canada, USA, Israel and Taiwan. I do not recall a single major conflict or dispute. Today the situation is totally different. There are no international conferences or symposia where alternative theories can be presented and discussed. Instead, opposing views are vigorously suppressed. This is not science.”  “Will Alexander: Predicting Climatic Extremes


2 Responses to “Will Alexander on the suppression of science by the AGW clergy”

  1. klem Says:

    It amazes me how so many voices disputing Anthropomorphic Climate Change are still being silenced in systemic ways. I was a climate alarmist until I read the UN IPCCs report 4 years ago. At that time I still believed that scientists would object if the conclusions of others were questionable. I particularly had faith in the physics community which has a reputation of being rather swift in rebuttal if the physics or math is shoddy. But I hear little from the physics community over the last few years, and this silence implies agreement with ACC theory. My question is; roughly what is the view of individual physicists regarding ACC, not the view of the National Physicists Associations or other organizations, but the views of individual physicists themselves?

  2. jblethen Says:

    Here is the view of one prominent skeptic and atmospheric physicist: Richard Lindzen: A Case Against Precipitous Climate Action

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: