My Resignation from the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences

Encouraged by the resignation of Hal Lewis from the American Physical Society, I hereby announce that I would have resigned from the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, had I been a member. 

Well, I am not a member, but I am,  as the only Nordic mathematician, on the ICIHighlyCited list of the worlds most cited scientists (including less than 10 Swedes in science/mathematics of a total 64 while the Academy counts to 175). 

My motivation is as follows: 

I. The Academy claims in its statement The Scientific Basis FOR Climate Change that 

• The effect of greenhouse gases is well established.

When I ask the Academy in writing for the scientific basis of this statement about this socalled greenhouse effect, I get the following written answer from Lennart Bengtsson, main responsible for the Academy statement:

• An excellent summary of earlier work,  Fourier(1824), Tyndall(1865), Arrhenius (1896) can be found in the book "The legacy of Svante Arrhenius understanding the greenhouse effect" Ed. Rodhe och Charlson, 1998 ISBN 91-7190-0284.  

I have commented on the lack of convincing science in this work in Fourier and his Greenhouse Effect, Tyndall and his Greenhouse Effect and Arrhenius and his Greenhouse Effect.

II. The Academy invites to a Seminar on Climate Simulation, but does not allow any question to be posed to the main speaker Lennart Bengtsson at the seminar. The Academy thereby violates the basic principle of science of open free discussion.

Combining I and II, I find an Academy which

• has taken on the role of scientific guarantee of Swedish climate politics, 
• carries this responsibility on a scientific basis which is questionable, but cannot be questioned.  
  

I don't want to be member of such an Academy. Is there really nobody among the 175 who has similar hesitations?

Compare with the analysis in 

• Is the Western Climate Establishment Corrupt?: Do Most Western Climate Scientists Believe Global Warming is Man-Made? The public might not understand the science, but they do understand cheating by Dr. David Evans.
  

Compare with earlier alarmist BBC changing foot: Doubts over scientist's climate change debate claims. When will Swedish Television also change policy and start to scrutinize the Academy? People understand cheating and Swedish Televison is the television of the people.

Read more about the resignation of Hal Lewis here.

Compare with Vaclav Klaus in The Climate Change Doctrine is Part of Environmentalism, Not of Science: 

• What also belongs here is our resolute opposition to the attempts to shut down such a crucial public debate concerning us and our way of life on the pretext that the overwhelming scientific consensus is there and that we have to act now. This is not true. Being free to raise questions and oppose fashionable politically and “lobbystically” promoted ideas forms an important and irreplaceable part of our democratic society. Not being allowed to do so would be a proof that we have already moved to the “brave new world” of a postdemocratic order. (I am tempted to say that we are already very close to it).
  

Compare with The Climate Scum.