onsdag 21 oktober 2009

The Political Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences

The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences made a statement on October 16 entitled The Scientific Basis for Climate Change including:
  • The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Working Group 1 (The Physical  Science Basis) has given a broad, systematic summary of the scientific literature on climate  change and has concluded that the anthropogenic emission of greenhouse gases has led to an  increase in the surface temperature of the Earth.
  • The relationship between climate forcing and the response to climate forcing is complex and  can only be reliably identified for periods of several decades and for hemispheric and global  domains. This is supported by both empirical and modelling studies. Trends of shorter periods  are unreliable and masked by the chaotic behaviour of the climate system. However, based on  detailed theoretical and modelling studies, IPCC concludes that the observed warming of the  climate from around 1970 is in broad agreement with the increase of greenhouse gases and  aerosols and consequently considers this to be the most probable main cause of the present  global warming.  
  • IPCC has undertaken modelling studies to estimate the effect of anthropogenic greenhouse  gases and aerosols on climate during the next 100 years based on different emission scenarios.  These studies indicate a global surface warming at the end of the 21st century of 1.5-3.5 °C  compared to present-day conditions. A large part of this warming is related to positive feedback  from water vapour that increases rapidly with higher temperature.  
  • Regrettably, we are not yet in a position to determine with any precision what is going to  happen.  
The Academy repeats what can be seen as a form of UN political propaganda by IPCC, which is a political and not a scientific organization, without an independent evaluation of the scientific truth and significance of what IPCC says. 

The statement is concluded with a graph of temperature anomalies, without any comment, as if the graph itself tells us the truth, whatever it is.

One may ask why an Academy of Sciences is urged to make a statement without a clear scientific content and meaning? Does the Academy support the findings of IPCC based on independent research performed within the Academy? Does the Academy accept the IPCC report without any independent critical evaluation? Is the Academy critical to the IPCC report? Is the statement political in support of Borg and Carlgren in their mission to close a climate deal, or scientific? 

Andreas Carlgren stated Oct 21 after the EU environment ministers agreed on Council Conclusions in the area of climate ahead of the meeting in Copenhagen:
  • The EU is now sending a forceful and clear signal to other countries in the run-up to the climate meeting in Copenhagen. We are prepared to show the political leadership necessary to save the climate and reach an agreement in Copenhagen that will keep global warming to under two degrees Centigrade.
  • Long-term targets for the EU of 80-95 per cent emissions reductions by 2050 compared with 1990 levels.
  • Clarification of EU demands on industrialised countries and developing countries alike. Industrialised countries are to reduce their emissions by 25-40 per cent by 2020. The reductions of developing countries will be 15-30 per cent compared with a situation in which no measures had been taken.
Fredrik Reinfeldt and Andreas Carlgren of The Kingdom of Sweden and EU, supported by The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, is now leading the world into a new carbonfree order...The King of Sweden cannot make political statements, but it appears that his Royal Swedish Academy can...

To better understand I have sent the following letter to the Academy:

To The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences

I have commented the statement on climate change by the Academy on my blog, and would like answers to the following questions posed there:
  • Has the Academy made an independent evaluation of the science presented by IPCC, and if so what is the result?
  • If not, why does the Academy as a scientific academy make a statement only repeating what IPCC says?
I will report on the answers by the Academy. The Academy is a "statlig myndighet", or governmental institution, and thus according to Swedish law has to answer...

No yet an answer on Nov 1. Is the Academy thinking or sleeping?

Inga kommentarer:

Skicka en kommentar