Just back from my meeting and I notice that there is a mini-furore over a story about Scientists warn[ing] of ‘global climate emergency’ over shifting jet stream. The scientists are Paul Beckwith who is currently a PhD student but has – I think – never published a climate science paper, and Robert Scribbler, a blogger. Turns out, unsurprisingly, that the story is utter nonsense. There’s no reason why air shouldn’t flow across the equator and it doing so is almost certainly not unprecendented.
In my view, the Independent promoting a “climate energency” story that is being promoted by bloggers is no different to Christopher Booker in the Telegraph promoting nonsense from Paul Homewood. It’s also a massive own goal because it allows people like Anthony Watts, Roy Spencer, and Joe Bastardi – for once – to be right about a ridiculous claim about climate catastrophe. Admittedly, one major difference is that when Booker promotes Homewood’s nonsense, the GWPF decides to have temperature review, while in this case, everyone who knows anything about climate science immediately points out that it’s nonsense. That doesn’t, of course, mean that it won’t be used for years and years as an example of climate catastrophism.
The real issue is that there are plenty of things to be concerned about without promoting a “climate emergency” based on something that is almost certainly not true. Promoting catastrophic scenarios that are simply untrue just plays into the hands of those who would rather avoid addressing this issue.