Professor Joanna Haigh of Imperial College is quite right to say that I am not a scientist (though I do have a Cambridge maths degree and a fairly good layman’s grasp of scientific principles). She might like to note first of all that I am a politician, and as such I am frequently obliged to form a view, and to vote, on issues that have a significant scientific component. If Prof Haigh wants to exclude all non-scientists from decision-making on such issues, she has just sounded the death-knell of democracy.
Secondly she might like to note that we are dealing here with climate science, and despite the nonsense claim of a “97% consensus”, the fact is that there are wide divergences of view amongst scientists. I have personally worked with expert reviewers from the IPCC panel itself who profoundly disagree with the IPCC conclusions. Prof Fred Singer of the University of Virginia says “The IPCC accepted my corrections to its punctuation — but not to its science”. One such reviewer, Paul Reiter of the Pasteur Institute in Paris, had to threaten to sue the IPCC to have his name removed from a section of the report with which he disagreed.
In these circumstances I as a politician have to take an informed view and decide and vote accordingly, and in forming that view I take account of the fact that IPCC predictions of global temperature have been repeatedly falsified by the data, and that there has been no additional warming for nearly two decades.
Yours etc. Roger Helmer.
Photo by djwtwo