date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 13:53:03 +0000 from: David Viner subject: Re: Press Summaries for Tuesday 8th February 2005 to: Tim Osborn , k.briffa Briffa Lenton's Words(amongst others having ago at CC science). Scientists at UEA have also cast doubt on the famous hockey stick graph used to convince us that global warming is a recent phenomena, with no allowance made for the well documented medieval warm period and the later Little Ice Age. The graph and its scary supporters assume that the climate in northern Europe over the past millennium has been roughly constant, but Timothy Osborn and Keith Briffa conclude that the true variability is likely to be much greater, and if it is, "the extent to which the recent warming can be viewed as 'unusual' would need to be reassessed". Tim and Keith The essay by HVS is all well and good, but that does not address the Lenton article in which you are either correctly represented or not. Do you agree with Lenton's precise words or not? Simple Yes or No? If you support Lenton's comments then the Unit needs to have a big discussion about them. If you do not then you should contact Lenton and put him right. If Lenton is wrong and you do not correct him then it will be people like me who have to pick up the pieces and spend more time addressing them, than you will spend by writing a short email to him. So do you want to take a few minutes now sending an email to Lenton or spend a greater amount of time taking this issue further. In new Scientist Tim is quoted: Arial"One of the conclusions we draw is that the climate’s sensitivity might be higher, and therefore future climate change will be greater,” So why can not you send this short excerpt to Lenton and a further piece to put him straight? David PS The issue about over dramatisation is one carried out by the media or pressure groups, and very rarely the scientists themselves, the other extracts of HVS's story aren't very good either. On 8 Feb 2005, at 12:40, Tim Osborn wrote: At 11:59 08/02/2005, David Viner wrote: Dear Keith and Tim please see below a summary of Lenton's piece. If you are happy with this fine, I and others here will pick up the pieces. If not it would be good if you could correct Lenton, if not it will just keep resurfacing every-time we speak to the media or give public presentations. It may mean a bit of hassle in the short term for you but is likely to create a lot more hassle for others. Cheers David David - here are some relevant excerpts from an essay recently published by von Storch: "...there is indeed a serious problem for the natural sciences: namely, the public depiction and perception of climate change. Research has landed in a crisis because its public actors assert themselves on the saturated market of discussion by overselling the topic.... ...The costs of stirring up fear are high... A scarce resource - public attention and trust in the reliability of science - is used up without being renewed by the practice of positive examples... ...The concealment of dissent and uncertainty in favor of a politically good cause takes its toll on credibility, for the public is more intelligent than is usually assumed. In the long term, these allegedly so helpful dramatizations achieve the opposite of that which they wish to achieve." Tim Dr Timothy J Osborn Climatic Research Unit School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK e-mail: t.osborn@uea.ac.uk phone: +44 1603 592089 fax: +44 1603 507784 web: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/~timo/ sunclock: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/~timo/sunclock.htm Geneva+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Dr David Viner Climatic Research Unit University of East Anglia Norwich NR4 7TJ Tel: +44 1603 592089 Fax: +44 1603 507784 http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/link http://www.e-clat.org Tourism and Climate Change http://ipcc-ddc.cru.uea.ac.uk +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++