date: Tue Jan 15 12:45:58 2008
from: Phil Jones 
subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Fwd: FYI: Daggers Are Drawn
to: Jean Jouzel 
    Jean,
       There are lots of other poor papers appearing at the moment. Susan is encouraging
    us all to write responses to them. I'm trying to do one, Ben Santer another and
    maybe David Parker a third.  All are wrong, but it just takes time to put something
    useful together.
       Why can't people just accept that the IPCC is right!!  In Britain we have people saying
    that the evidence is accepted - we've won the war, now let's act!
        I'll see if I can persuade someone to follow up on the Science editorial.
    I did talk to the journalist, mostly trying to persuade him not to run with the
    story.
    Cheers
    Phil
   From The Sunday Times
   January 13, 2008
   The Hot Topic: How to Tackle Global Warming and Still Keep the Lights On by Gabrielle
   Walker and David King
   Reviewed by Richard Girling
   It will be said of this book that it should be pressed into the hands of all those who deny
   the reality of climate change, or who think human activity is not contributing to it. But
   of course it won't be and, even if it were, they wouldn't open it. Those on Planet Exxon
   are beyond the pull of reason.
   The fate of Gabrielle Walker and David King will be to preach to the converted. It does no
   harm to have an endorsement from Al Gore (who found the book "a beacon of clarity"), but
   how much more satisfying it would have been to see Dick Cheney on the cover. Cheney and
   King, who until recently was chief scientific adviser to the UK government, are mutual
   bêtes noirs.
   Cheney, the former vice-president of Halliburton, typifies for King the commercial
   degradation of American politics, exalting economic short-termism über alles and inviting
   the future to go hang itself. For the string-pullers in the Bush administration, King is a
   wantonly destructive mullah in a scientific axis of evil. In 2004, when he concluded that
   climate change was a worse threat than terrorism, the White House let the dogs out. Bush's
   climate-change adviser Myron Ebell (who, not-so-coincidentally, was director of the
   Competitive Enterprise Institute, the Exxon-funded "think-tank") denounced King as "an
   alarmist with ridiculous views who knows nothing about climate change". Given airtime by
   Radio 4's Today programme, Ebell argued that global warming was "a tissue of
   improbabilities" cooked up by European climatologists in the pay of governments whose only
   interest was to "attack America's economic superiority". Even No 10, self-proclaimed world
   leader on climate change, took fright and tried to put a sock in King's mouth (amusingly,
   he was advised to steer clear of Today).
   With Australia, America's last partner in obduracy, now having signed up to the Kyoto
   Protocol (an event that occurred too late for the authors to celebrate here), the world has
   decided whose views it finds ridiculous. Insofar as the science is concerned, the battle is
   won and the opposition reduced, as Walker and King put it, to "vested interests or fools",
   who won't be queuing to read this exposure of their stupidity. Even America itself has had
   to acknowledge the probable existence of man-made climate change. But this does not mean
   the future can sleep easy in its bed. "Social, economic and cultural barriers," the authors
   say, "all stand between the world we have now and the one we will soon have as climate
   takes its toll."
   With the clarity that Gore rightly commends, they do a fine job of setting out the issues.
   If you've got a climate sceptic to deal with, you'll find all the ammunition you need to
   puncture his certainties. Even-handedly, they do the same with the end-is-nigh
   overstatements of the extremely-greens - no, the Gulf Stream is not about to shut down, and
   it will take time before London, New York and Tokyo are consumed by floods. Much of the
   content will be familiar to any literate person with an interest in the world. But as well
   as revisiting the basics (why and how warming is happening, why we need carbon reduction
   targets, what faces us if we fail to meet them), Hot Topic precisely locates the political
   impasse and delineates the issues that have to be resolved between the developed countries
   (which caused the problem and possess the technological resources to defend themselves) and
   the developing ones (who are innocent victims but will bear the worst and earliest
   consequences).
   Where does fairness lie? Should the heaviest polluters with the most luxurious lifestyles
   gradually cut their emissions, and the lightest polluters with the most deprived lifestyles
   be allowed to increase theirs until they meet at some mutually agreeable point in the
   middle? Should targets be set for individual market sectors or industries? Should emissions
   targets be calculated per unit of economic growth (a proposal unlikely to have much effect
   environmentally, but likely to favoured by the Americans)? How can multinational polluters
   such as air transport and shipping be accounted for?
   Remarkably, while acknowledging that "no single approach will be acceptable to everybody",
   Walker and King manage to keep their spirits up. They identify some unlikely heroes -
   Arnold Schwarzenegger, for example, who has committed his Californian bailiwick to an 80%
   emissions reduction by 2050 and, to set an example, "has taken to driving a hybrid Hummer";
   and the citizens of the oilman's capital, Austin, Texas, who aim to be carbon-neutral by
   2020. They encourage us to be part of the solution. We mustn't be nimbyish about
   wind-farms; must be open-minded about nuclear power; must measure and reduce our carbon
   footprints. We must keep ourselves informed, and make sure our community leaders do the
   same.
   To be fully connected citizens of the modern world, we need to understand the price our
   children and grandchildren will pay if we refuse to acknowledge their right to a livable
   planet. The catastrophes of Katrina and Darfur might not have been due directly to global
   warming but, in their hideous combinations of natural disaster and human conflict, they
   stand as stark templates for an unreformed world. No family bookshelf is complete without
   an account of the most burning issue of the age. "I don't believe," said King, at the time
   of his attempted muzzling in 2004, "that we can keep the public on side if it is not
   understood . . . that our scientists are prepared to give out and say what they mean." That
   he stood his ground, and has said what he means with such lucidity, is a material gain for
   the axis of good.
   Warm-up men
   Walker and King take aim in their book at several of the more common myths about climate
   change. They dismiss arguments that it was warmer in the Middle Ages than today
   ("temperatures are higher now than they have been for at least 1,000 years", they insist)
   and disagree with the idea that warming is due to changes in the sun (in fact, "left to
   itself, the sun would have caused a slight cooling"). The disappearance of snow from Mount
   Kilimanjaro, they point out, tells us little about global warming (the retreat actually
   started in the early 19th century, and is not yet fully understood), and Antarctica is not
   about to slide into the sea - the old, cold eastern half is unlikely to melt, and much of
   the more vulnerable West Antarctic ice sheet can be saved, they say, if we act quickly.
   THE HOT TOPIC: How to Tackle Global Warming and Still Keep the Lights On by Gabrielle
   Walker and David King
   Bloomsbury £9.99 pp309
   Available at the Books First price of £9.49 (including p&p) on 0870 165 8585
   Prof. Phil Jones
   Climatic Research Unit        Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
   School of Environmental Sciences    Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
   University of East Anglia
   Norwich                          Email    p.jones@uea.ac.uk
   NR4 7TJ
   UK
   ----------------------------------------------------------------------------