Scientists offered cash to dispute climate study
"Ian Sample, science correspondent
Friday February 2, 2007
Scientists and economists have been offered $10,000 each by a lobby
group funded by one of the world's largest oil companies to undermine
a major climate change report due to be published today.
Letters sent by the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), an
ExxonMobil-funded thinktank with close links to the Bush
administration, offered the payments for articles that emphasise the
shortcomings of a report from the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC).
Travel expenses and additional payments were also offered.
The UN report was written by international experts and is widely
regarded as the most comprehensive review yet of climate change
science. It will underpin international negotiations on new emissions
targets to succeed the Kyoto agreement, the first phase of which
expires in 2012. World governments were given a draft last year and
invited to comment.
The AEI has received more than $1.6m from ExxonMobil and more than 20
of its staff have worked as consultants to the Bush administration.
Lee Raymond, a former head of ExxonMobil, is the vice-chairman of
AEI's board of trustees.
The letters, sent to scientists in Britain, the US and elsewhere,
attack the UN's panel as "resistant to reasonable criticism and
dissent and prone to summary conclusions that are poorly supported by
the analytical work" and ask for essays that "thoughtfully explore
the limitations of climate model outputs".
Climate scientists described the move yesterday as an attempt to cast
doubt over the "overwhelming scientific evidence" on global warming.
"It's a desperate attempt by an organisation who wants to distort
science for their own political aims," said David Viner of the
Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia.
"The IPCC process is probably the most thorough and open review
undertaken in any discipline. This undermines the confidence of the
public in the scientific community and the ability of governments to
take on sound scientific advice," he said.
The letters were sent by Kenneth Green, a visiting scholar at AEI,
who confirmed that the organisation had approached scientists,
economists and policy analysts to write articles for an independent
review that would highlight the strengths and weaknesses of the IPCC
"Right now, the whole debate is polarised," he said. "One group says
that anyone with any doubts whatsoever are deniers and the other
group is saying that anyone who wants to take action is alarmist. We
don't think that approach has a lot of utility for intelligent policy."
One American scientist turned down the offer, citing fears that the
report could easily be misused for political gain. "You wouldn't know
if some of the other authors might say nothing's going to happen,
that we should ignore it, or that it's not our fault," said Steve
Schroeder, a professor at Texas A&M university.
The contents of the IPCC report have been an open secret since the
Bush administration posted its draft copy on the internet in April.
It says there is a 90% chance that human activity is warming the
planet, and that global average temperatures will rise by another 1.5
to 5.8C this century, depending on emissions.
Lord Rees of Ludlow, the president of the Royal Society, Britain's
most prestigious scientific institute, said: "The IPCC is the world's
leading authority on climate change and its latest report will
provide a comprehensive picture of the latest scientific
understanding on the issue. It is expected to stress, more
convincingly than ever before, that our planet is already warming due
to human actions, and that 'business as usual' would lead to
unacceptable risks, underscoring the urgent need for concerted
international action to reduce the worst impacts of climate change.
However, yet again, there will be a vocal minority with their own
agendas who will try to suggest otherwise."
Ben Stewart of Greenpeace said: "The AEI is more than just a
thinktank, it functions as the Bush administration's intellectual
Cosa Nostra. They are White House surrogates in the last throes of
their campaign of climate change denial. They lost on the science;
they lost on the moral case for action. All they've got left is a
suitcase full of cash."
On Monday, another Exxon-funded organisation based in Canada will
launch a review in London which casts doubt on the IPCC report. Among
its authors are Tad Murty, a former scientist who believes human
activity makes no contribution to global warming. Confirmed VIPs
attending include Nigel Lawson and David Bellamy, who believes there
is no link between burning fossil fuels and global warming."
William T Goodall
Mail : wtg@...
Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk
Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/
I think a case can be made that faith is one of the world's great
evils, comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to eradicate. -