If you like our work, you could help us very much by
looking at the great offer Globat has for you. Thanks!
A high degree of double-talk
(AFR Septembre, 4th, 2002)
Des Moore argues there's
almost fraud in data being
used to support the climate change argument
If you want to contribute with our work, sending no money,
At the UN Summit
on Sustainable Development
in Johannesburg the reference to the Kyoto Protocol in the Summit statement
on climate change apparently goes no further than strongly urging states that
have not done so to "ratify the Protocol in a timely manner."
Australia is not signing the Protocol because it
rejects the UN's latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) projections
that temperatures will increase by 1.4 to 5.8 degrees Celsius over the period
1990 to 2100 unless greenhouse gas emissions are reduced in accordance with
the Protocol. Rather, the Government is rejecting it on economic grounds largely
because the exemption of developing countries from the reduction requirement
would undermine our export competitiveness and, along with the US' refusal to
sign, make any implementation substantially ineffective.
Indeed, substantive critics of the IPCC temperature projections have been brushed
off by Federal Ministers and advised to pursue the matter with relevant scientific
the implication being that the Government accepts the projections. But these
critics have now established a strong case suggesting the projections are
close to scientific fraud.
It might seem radical to question analyses by otherwise well-respected
Australian scientists with views in line with those of many overseas
colleagues. But there is a long history of naïve acceptance by scientists
of theories that have proved false.
In the 1970s, for example, three Club of Rome scientists predicted shortages
of resources would cause growth in the world economy and population to come
to a "sudden and uncontrollable decline" unless population and living
standards were "stabilized".
The shortage of resources threat had
no real scientific basis and,
had governments acted upon it, considerable
unnecessary misery and poverty would have resulted. In
similar vein, implementation of the Kyoto proposals would require a major cut-back
in economic growth in developed countries, with inevitable adverse effects on
developing countries too.
What, then, is the basis for thinking the scientists are wrong again?
First, the rate of increase in temperatures over recent years has been much
less than that now projected by the IPCC and that group takes inadequate account
of temperature influences not caused by greenhouse gas emissions. In fact, temperatures
show an increase of only about 0.3 degrees Celsius since 1976 and analyses suggests
up to only about a third of that increase could conceivably be due to greenhouse
gas emissions. An increase of
0.1% in temperatures over a 25 year period hardly forms a scientific basis for
projections that would require drastic action to reduce economic growth.
Second, even if we start from the time temperature measurement began in 1860,
the warming has only been a modest 0.6°C notwithstanding the large increase
in emissions of greenhouse gases since then. Moreover, scientists have taken
no account of the likelihood that this
warming may largely reflect a "natural" rebound from particularly
low temperatures in an earlier period.
Third, the temperature projections are based on assumptions about economic growth
that are absurdly unrealistic. Analyses by former Australian
Statistician, Ian Castles,
show that even the lowest temperature projection of 1.4 degree assumes growth
in GDP per capita in developing countries alone that, short of a miracle, is
unachievable. Castles has written to the Chair of the IPCC, Dr Rajendra Packauri,
advising him of the serious
deficiencies in the emission
projections and calling on the IPCC to advise governments of these deficiencies
as a matter of urgency.
Castles recently challenged the income distribution analysis in the UN's Human
Development Report and was found by the UN
Statistical Commission to be correct.
Fourth, as Castles has also pointed out, the temperature projections wrongly
assume that economic growth will necessarily be accompanied by higher emissions
on a per capita basis. Competitive market economies operate over time in ways
that improve economic efficiency and tend to reduce the use of energy per unit
of output. For example, global carbon-dioxide emissions per head from the burning
of fossil fuels (the main source of greenhouse gases) peaked
in 1979 and have since declined by nearly 10 per cent.
These and other significant flaws in the temperature projections suggest that
the time has come for a more
comprehensive investigation of a theory now bearing the hallmarks of the Club
of Rome farce.
Des Moore is Director of the Institute for Private Enterprise in Australia
Back to TOP
Back to Warming
Go to FAEC's Spanish Version
You are visitor No.:
since July, 2001
FastCounter by bCentral
please click the icons below, Thanks you, very much!
The Terapin mine stores thousands of your digital photographs easily
without expensive memory cards nor laptop. See how it works here...