The other night, I amused myself by looking up all the people on IPCC’s Core Writing Team (the 4th report). Here are the results of the Swedish jury:

Name - Title
Bernstein, Lenny - Ph.D. in Chemical Engineering
Bosch, Peter - Technical Support Unit
Canziani, Osvaldo - Professor, Applied Meteorology
Chen, Zhenlin - Deputy Director-General of the Department of International Cooperation, China Meteorological Administration
Christ, Renate - Secretary IPCC
Davidson, Ogunlade - Professor, Mechanical Engineering
Hare, William - B.Sc. in Environmental Science and Physics, visiting scientist on leave from Greenpeace
Huq, Saleemul - B.Sc. and Ph.D. in Plant Sciences
Karoly, David - Professor, Meteorology
Kattsov, Vladimir - Doctor of Sciences in Physics and Mathematics with a specialty in atmosphere and hydrosphere physics
Kundzewicz, Zbyszek- International Association of Hydrological Sciences
Liu, Jian - Secretariat, IPCC
Lohmann, Ulrike - Professor, Experimental Atmospheric Physics
Manning, Martin - Former head of the IPCC Technical Support Unit, Professor at Victoria University, Wellington, New Zealand
Matsuno, Taroh - Fundamental contributions to the theory of waves and wave flow interaction in geophysical systems
Menne, Bettina - Medical Officer, WHO
Metz, Bert - Dr. in Chemical Engineering
Mirza, Monirul - Environmental scientist
Nicholls, Neville - Senior Principal Research Scientist and Leader, Climate Forecasting Group, Bureau of Meteorology Research Centre
Nurse, Leonard - M.Sc. Climatology
Pachauri, Rajendra - Chairman, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Palutikof, Jean - Technical Support Unit IPCC
Parry, Martin - Professor, Environmental Science
Qin, Dahe - Head of the China Meteorological Administration
Ravindranath, Nijavalli - BSc. and MSc. in Agriculture, Ph.D. in Humanities-Economics
Reisinger, Andy - Ph.D. in Environmental Physics
Ren, Jiawen - Research specialty: glaciology
Riahi, Keywan - Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering, Industrial Management, and Economics
Rosenzweig, Cynthia - B.Sc. in Agricultural Sciences
Rusticucci, Matilde - Meteorologist
Schneider, Stephen - Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering and Plasma Physics
Sokona, Youba - Executive Secretary of the Sahara and Sahel Observatory (OSS)
Solomon, Susan - Atmospheric Chemistry
Stott, Peter - Climate scientist
Stouffer, Ronald - M.Sc. in Meteorology
Sugiyama, Taishi - Senior Researcher at the Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry
Swart, Rob - Head of the Technical Support Unit
Tirpak, Dennis, Director of the Global Change Division, Office of Policy and Planning, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Vogel, Coleen - Professor, Sustainability, climatologist by training
Yohe, Gary - M.A., Mathematics, M.Phil. and Ph.D., Economics, Environmental economist

40 people, whereof 18 with a clear link to climate studies. Although I could be wrong, since I’m no expert in these issues. Next, I’m thinking of contacting them to see if they agree with IPCC’s latest report.

A Mr Matthew Roman from Binghamton, New York, explains to us in PressConnects why scientists shouldn’t be trusted. According to Mr Roman, who probably has done extensive research on the subject, the global cooling argument presented in the 70s is just part of The Big Lie.

Global warming deniers claim there was scientific consensus about global cooling 30 years ago. They state that scientists are not to be trusted because they believed in global cooling once, they now believe in global warming and they will soon again believe in global cooling.

This is an example of “Big Lie” propaganda. As noted in the Feb. 21 edition of USA Today, the American Meteorological Society surveyed the scientific literature from 1965 through 1979. They found 44 peer reviewed articles on global warming and seven on global cooling.
The real consensus was the same then as it is now. Scientists agree that global warming is real and is exacerbated by human activities.

Now, this story isn’t really about Matthew Roman and I want to point that out. Neither is it about trusting science and scientists. What I find intriguing instead is how easy it is for someone to accept something that has been printed in a newspaper. There are many Matthew Romans in this world. People who rely on media reports without even thinking, questioning.

Of today’s global warming, most of it has occured not in reality but rather in the media. Science has been manipulated, exaggerated and misused, all to prove that humans are destroying the planet. There has never been a consensus among scientists about the causes of global warming. Perhaps there never will be. Perhaps the whole purpose of science is to question and to disagree in order to advance our knowledge.

What I wish for is objectivity and a balanced view of what is going on. But as long as there is no news like bad news, I guess that isn’t going to happen.