Many academics genuinely believe that promoting anxiety and fear about a problem is a form of valium public service, according to Frank Furedi, a professor of sociology at Kent University, writing in The Times Higher Education Supplement last month.
The articles includes the comment:
The defence of the “good lie” or the “greater truth” is invoked when inflated stories are peddled to raise awareness of an issue. …
Appeals to a “greater truth” are prominent in debates about the environment. It is claimed that problems such as global warming are so important that a campaign of fear is justified. Stephen Schneider, a climatologist at Stanford University, justified the distortion of evidence in the following terms: “Because we are not just scientists but human beings… as well… we need to capture the public imagination.” He added that “we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified statements and make little mention of any doubts that we have”. With such attitudes widely circulated, is it any wonder that Hurricane Katrina is widely perceived as punishment for humanity’s environmental sins? That advocacy research translates so well into the language of divine retribution indicates how the crusading spirit can destroy the integrity of academic enterprise.
Of course academics are entitled to adopt a partisan role. They also have a right to raise concerns about the problems that capture their imagination.
We are also normal human beings who can get carried away with the findings of our research. Academic passion and commitment make a significant contribution to society. But however noble the ideals that motivate it, the promotion of fear displaces the quest for the truth. Instead of clarifying issues it contributes to a dishonest polarisation of attitudes that invariably closes down discussion. Fear entrepreneurship on campuses, like elsewhere, serves only the interest of intolerance and prejudice.
I reckon the biggest lie from the global warming alarmists is that it is going to get drier as it gets warmer.
On 27th May last year ABC Radio’s World Today had a feature titled ‘Changing conditions means more efficient water use needed: expert’ in which Peter Cullen suggested that as a consequence of climate change there will be more droughts and that agriculture will need to re-adjust. A few months later Tim Flannery was on ABC TV’s 7.30 Report (23rd June 2004) telling us that Australia was going to be affected by climate change sooner and harder than anywhere else on the planet and that Perth may end up a ‘ghost metropolis’ from lack of rain.
That was before the drought broke. I had a look at dam levels in Perth this morning and they keep rising, click here.
Isn’t it true that as it gets warmer it is, on average, going to get wetter? That’s what Australia’s climatologists tell us (Australasian Science, June 2004). That’s why there is more snow falling on Greenland. Furthermore, a paper by Roderick and Farquhar in the International Journal of Climatology (Vol 24, Issue 9, 2004) indicates that contrary to expectations, measurements of pan evaporation show decreases over the last 30 years in many parts of the Northern Hemisphere and also across Australia.
There seems a great propensity to exaggerate water issues and suggest that there is everywhere a shortage.
Media headlines in Queensland’s south east over the last week have focused on Brisbane Lord Mayor’s anger at nearby Gold Coast and Redlands decisions to reduce water restrictions and allow watering of gardens from 4pm rather than sticking with a 7pm to 7am regime. Redlands have a near full dam and completely independent water supply, yet Brisbane’s Lord Mayor wants everyone to suffer the restrictions. It doesn’t make sense to me.
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD has worked in industry and government. She is currently researching a novel technique for long-range weather forecasting funded by the B. Macfie Family Foundation.