Misquoting doesn't alter global cooling

I listened carefully to Sir John’s words, having studied and applied meteorology as an airline training captain. Both Sir John and I know that the Arctic ice this year recorded its biggest measured gain of any February, according to Nasa. Late last month, Winnipeg and Ulan Bator were still around minus-20 degrees Celsius, and North America, northern China and the UK and other parts of Europe were still in deep freeze. So the Arctic ice would still be expanding. 

What Sir John clearly said was that climate change is now “caused [directly] by man’s pollutants”. He also said the evidence was clear, but failed to tell us what data were used. We can only guess Sir John’s new computer model says that, even without warming, we would still have massive climatic disruptions.

A brief recap reminds us that, a decade ago, it was always manmade “global cooling”. Then came “global warming”, until the big November 2008 UK freeze, which overturned the forecast of a warm, snow-free winter. That necessitated an urgent renaming, and the phenomenon became “climate change, caused by global warming”, not that any data for this were ever offered. Now, and just from last week, we have “climate change” with no warming involved.

Does Mr Bowler have a financial stake in windmills, or is he just trying to save Bangkok from flooding from an imaginary rise in sea level? Maybe he can explain the new science to The Nation’s readers so that we can confidently do whatever is required.

Thomas Turk

Phuket