I have written this comment on the BMJ Blog on climate change in response to this article, “Nell Crowden: What’s bad for the climate is bad for health.”.
I do not think James Dellingpole and Lord Monckton would necessarily agree, and me for example. Prof Phil Jones was asked whether there has been any statistically significant increase in global warming since 1997 and the answer was no.
In Roman times grapes for wine were grown as far north as South Scotland. In the 1920s while digging up Finchley Road Tube Station, the scree exposed suggested that was the furthest extent of the last ice age. The UK must have had a climate similar to north Sweden. While conversely 7 miles south at Trafalgar Square, underneath Nelson’s Column the bones of lions and rhinoceros from 250,000 years ago suggesting we had a climate similar to the African savannah. Climate changes naturally.
I am old enough to remember the BBC Radio Times front cover from I think 1976 where a new Ice Age was due upon us. The reason stated was that the smoke from coal and oil was blotting out the sun. Now it is blamed for global warming.
I remain truly sceptical for two reasons. Most of the people who are the main protagonists are paid by the state and as Dellingpole’s latest book suggests are and/or left wing “watermelons.” Green on the outside, red on the inside. The fall of the Berlin Wall exposed the economic desperation and incompetence of socialism. The left lost the economic argument and now wants new ways to control us and denigrate capitalism. Climate change is the perfect platform to go big business bashing. The other way is controlling our bodies.
Smoking bans and restrictions, obesity and McDonalds bashing, and now the demonisation of alcohol and drinkers. The left know what is good for us.
The second reason is that my expertise is smoking. I am happy to concede that ACTIVE smoking is as bad as the anti smokers make out. However the reason for smoking bans is the supposed harm of PASSIVE smoking. It is hugely ironic that I believe the commentator below (Richard Smith) was the one Editor (then of the BMJ) brave enough to publish a 40 year study into passive smoking which found no correlation between second hand cigarette smoke and lung cancer. This falls into line with 85% of the other papers.
From my experience of tobacco control they have mislead the public and governments on a Biblical scale. Dissenting scientists have been hounded out of their jobs or silenced. Quite obvious endemic publication bias approaching fraud. Ad hominem and personal attacks replace debate. Science to me as a layman has returned to the alchemy of the medieval ages. Politics has replaced science and objectivity, grants and loans give the proponents a tidy living and media access/ego scratching.
It is no coincidence that oil companies are tarred with using the same tactics as tobacco companies by their opponents.
I can see this all in the AGW Climate camp. It uses the same rent seeking, dubious tactics as the anti smokers. This is yet more junk science.