David Bellamy, OBE.,
FLS,. DSC., DUniv., C.Biol., FIBiol., FRIN.
Professor Adult and Continuing Education-University of Durham.
Special Professor of Geography University of Nottingham. Hon
Professor of the University of Central Queensland.
The Conservation Foundation, Durham. Surrey and Birmingham
Wildlife Trusts, Coral Cay Conservation, National Association
for Environmental Education. British Naturalists Association,
Conservation Volunteers of Ireland, British Institute of
Cleaning Science, British Home and Holiday Parks Association,
Camping and Caravanning Club Of Great Britain.
British Trust for Conservation Volunteers, Fauna and
International, Marine Conservation Society, Australian Marine
Conservation Society, Wild Trout Trust, Countrywide Holidays
of the Living Landscape Trust, Hon Fellow Chartered Institute of
Water and Environmental Management. Honourary Member of the
Emirates Environment Group.
consultant, Author of 44 books, Writer and presenter of some 400
television progammes on Botany, Ecology and Environment.
of The Dutch Order of the Golden Ark, the U.N.E.P. Global
The Duke of Edinburgh’s Award for Underwater Research;
Richard Dimbleby Award., BSAC Diver of The Year Award, RGS Busk
Chair of the International committee for the Tourism for
Tomorrow Awards. 1995- 93.
along with David Shreeve of The Conservation Foundation and the
Ford European Conservation Awards.
Contact us if
you would like to submit an opinion piece. We are seeking
commentators on a range of topics, including: RMA, crime and
justice, environmental issues, Maori issues, a NZ constitution
and governance. Contact
Skip to comment form |
to poll |
Send to a friend
Opinion piece by Prof. David Bellamy
24 June 07
Global Warming Myth
I worried about carbon induced global warming? The answer is
no and yes. No because there has been no sign of global
warming in New Zealand since 1955, this year snow has fallen
in Portugal for the first time in 52 years and 3 US states are
united by the fact that they have recorded their lowest
temperatures ever. Yes because it has become a political
football that has lost its foundations in real science.
especially worries me is that if anyone dares to question the
dogma of the global warming doomsters who repeatedly tell us
that C not only stands for carbon but for climate catastrophe,
we are immediately vilified as heretics or worse as deniers.
am quite happy to be branded a heretic because throughout
history heretics have stood up against dogma based on bigotry.
don’t like being called a denier because deniers don’t
believe in facts. There are no facts linking the concentration
of atmospheric carbon dioxide with imminent catastrophic
global warming there are only predictions based on complex
calling may be acceptable in political circles but it has no
place in the language of science, indeed what is happening in
the annals of global warming smacks of Macarthyism complete
with witch hunts.
science is carried out in a robust way through reasoned
argument based on well researched data and although it may
dent the ego of the loser it does not smear the name of
offer two simple data sets that are already in the public
most reliable global, regional and local temperature records
from around the world display no distinguishable trend up or
down over the past century.
last peak temperatures were around 1940 and 1998, with troughs
of low temperature around 1910 and 1970.
second dip caused pop science and the media to cry wolf about
a catastrophic ice age just around the corner. Our end was
nigh! As soon as the temperatures took an upward turn in the
1980’s the scaremongers changed their tune switching their
dogma to imminent catastrophic scenarios of global warming all
based on computer models some that were proved to be as bent
as the hockey stick which no longer features in IPCC’s
used to discuss climate change with my undergraduates and
point out that there was much good scientific evidence that
the latest of a string of ice ages had affected the climate
and sea levels around the world. Thank goodness it began to
come to an end a mere 18,000 to 20,000 years ago The Romans
grew grapes in York and during the world wide medieval warm
period when civilization blossomed across the world, Nordic
settlers farmed lowland Greenland (hence its name) and then
got wiped out by the Little Ice Age that only started to wane
to the data, how can a sixty-year cycle of changing
temperature give any credibility to claims that carbon dioxide
is causing an inexorable march towards a climate Armageddon.
concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has risen
throughout this time frame, yet the temperature has gone up
and down in a cyclical manner. How can this be explained
unless there are other factors in control overriding the
effect of this greenhouse gas? There are of course many to be
found in peer reviewed literature, solar cycles, cosmic ray
cloud control and those little rascals El Ninos and La Ninas
all of which are played down or even ignored by the global
warming brigade. As are the positive aspects of carbon dioxide
in the growth of plants.
to that the fact that since 1998 the world’s average
temperature has shown a tendency to fall not rise. This fact
the warmers play down by arguing that you need a 10 year
period, or better still a 30 year period to register a
convincing change. Well 2008 is just around the corner and
sadly another 20 years on the next natural cycle will have
done its best or worse vindicating carbon dioxide as the
villain of the piece.
to Al Gore’s doom and gloom laden Oscar, I will pose but two
questions. Why scare the families of the world with tales that
polar bears are heading for extinction when there is good
evidence that there are now twice as many of these iconic
animals, most doing well in the Arctic than there were 20
years ago? Why cry wolf on a rise in the spread of malaria
thanks to rising temperatures when this mosquito borne disease
was a main killer of people throughout the Little Ice Age in
Britain and northern Russia?
date it has cost the world around $ US 50 billion to spread
global warming doom and gloom. However now thanks to questions
asked by we the sceptics The New Zealand National Institute of
Water and Atmospheric Research’s Dr Jim Renwick has spilt
the beans that "Climate prediction is hard, half of the
variability in the climate system is not predictable, so we
don't expect to do terrifically well." Later on New
Zealand radio, Dr Renwick said: " The weather is not
predictable beyond a week or two." The spin of a coin
starts a rugby match the spin on 50 million greenbacks surely
deserves an unbiased referee.
Zealand leads the world in the eradication of feral plants and
animals making restoration of the natural ecosystems that kept
the biosphere in balance long before the IPCC was invented.
Habitat destruction and the loss of biodiversity is one of the
greatest threats to climate and landscape stability. I beg
your government to continue to lead the world in this
the words of a great mathematician and satirist Tom Lehrer,
“Don’t be scared be prepared”.
would like to comment on this issue please click
Skip to top | Skip