Watch for climate change ‘quackery’

Sir, - In response to Dr Wardrop’s letter containing his many questions (Letters, June 10), I ask for Dr Wardrop to provide the source of the information which states that the computer modelling used by the UN Inter-Governmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC) is flawed. It seems that it is based on a faulty computer model.

He uses the words “unvalidated” and “unreliable” as valid descriptions of these computer models. These are serious words and if true indicate that the IPCC results should be treated with some scepticism. Messrs Wardrop, Bryce and Cross seem to be in that same sceptical camp.

Dr Wardrop has previously cited a website called Electroverse as a source of his beliefs on the climate crisis, or lack of.

I have read some of the pages on this website and am concerned that the facts seemed to be at odds with current thinking, and I searched for a fact-check web page. These are handy pages that save the reader hours of research.

The fact check sites Media Bias/Fact Check and Hughes Fact Check have performed an investigation into Electroverse which was described as pseudo-science and rated low in credibility.

An extract from MB/FC summarises Electroverse content thus: “Overall, we rate Electroverse a quackerylevel pseudo-science source based on the promotion of misinformation regarding climate change that does not align with the consensus of science.”

Many other of the doctor’s views are also exposed by a website called ScepticalScience.com and

is worth a read by your readership.

Alistair Ballantyne. Birkhill, Angus.