Examiner Interview with Fred Singer on Climate Science

The Examiners interview with Fred Singer gives a summary of the present state of climate science. The interview ends with the following question and answer: You've devoted a lot of time and energy to this debate. Are you optimistic or pessimistic?

Singer: 

• I am really quite optimistic. I am sure that sound science must -- and will -- win out in the long run and convince not only scientists but also the public and politicians that climate change is almost all natural, and that a modest warming, should it occur, is good for humanity overall. 
• The revelations of “ClimateGate” will be very helpful here and show how a gang of determined climatologists was able to con almost everyone by cooking the data and stifling any scientific criticism from 'skeptics.'Of course, 'long run' may mean many more years -- during which the alarmists will try to impose policies that produce great economic hardships for no good reason. 
• I fear especially those who have learned to game the system and are using global warming scares to enrich themselves at our expense. I won't mention names but you know who they are: 
• Utopians who believe that global governance will lead to a better world; 
• Luddites who oppose technological advance and economic growth; 
• international bureaucrats and profiteers who want power and money. 
• If they ever gain the upper hand, the world may have a difficult time recovering.
• I hope I can be around when we can look back on past decades and say: "How could this climate insanity have fooled so many smart people?"
  

Singer cannot be expected to think highly of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences

because of its unconditional support of IPCC and denial of Climategate. What does the Academy think of Singer?

The Academy should also get a bit nervous by contemplating the anticipated evaporation of  IPPC and its supports by TonyN and the analysis of Tony Hake in the Examiner:

• Other scientific organizations including the American Physical Society (APS) and the American Chemical Society (ACS) saw rifts grow in their membership. It became clear as the year progressed that the so-called scientific ‘consensus’ was anything but.
  

The experience of the Canadian Example by Tim Ball is also illuminating.