“It is not enough for climate scientists and environment ministers to go to Copenhagen and tell each other how right they are. They also need to convince the public. National politics — the democratic process — is awfully inconvenient sometimes, but cannot be waved away,” Clive Crook writes in the Financial Times.
“The climate-science establishment — scientists subscribing to the global-warming consensus and most governments, judging by words, not deeds — understands this. This is why the Copenhagen meeting has a theatrical aspect; it is as much about public relations as about serious efforts to confront global warming,” Mr. Crook said.
“The experts are intent on stirring up — they would say ‘educating’ — public opinion. From their own point of view, however, they are making a hash of it. ...
“Consider the response to Climategate — the scandal over emails from the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia. The e-mails showed some of the world’s leading climate scientists talking about a statistical ‘trick’ to ‘hide the decline’ in a proxy measure of temperature, musing over how to keep dissenters out of the literature, discussing the deletion of data that might be subject to Freedom of Information Act requests, and more.
“Any fair-minded person would regard those exchanges as raising questions. On the face of it, these are not the standards one expects of science. Nor is this just any science. The work of these researchers is being used to press the case for economic policies with colossal adjustment costs. Plainly, the highest standards of intellectual honesty and openness are called for. The e-mails do not attest to such standards.
“Yet how did the establishment respond? It said that this is how