FACT-CHECK BOY DERIDES AGAIN

Lefty computing teacher Tim Lambert is an anthropogenic climate change true believer. He is therefore unhappy with the letter to Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper signed by sixty scientists advising the government to revisit the science of Global Warming. The thrust of the letter is as follows:

As accredited experts in climate and related scientific disciplines, we are writing to propose that balanced, comprehensive public-consultation sessions be held so as to examine the scientific foundation of the federal government's climate-change plans.

All the letter asks for is open discussion of climate change. Lambert, obviously eager to prevent scrutiny of the scientific underpinnings of Global Warming, offers a multipoint attack on the letter:

1. A Google search of "climate change is real" proves it is anthropogenic.
2. Climate change must be anthropogenic because six Australian business leaders believe it is.
3. The credibility of seventeen of the sixty scientists is questionable because they have made past errors of interpretation or fact.
4. Most of the sixty are not climate scientists.
5. The letter must be a crock because Tim Blair linked to it.
   

Lambert also takes exception to this from the letter:

"Observational evidence does not support today's computer climate models, so there is little reason to trust model predictions of the future. ... Nevertheless, significant advances have been made since the protocol was created, many of which are taking us away from a concern about increasing greenhouse gases. If, back in the mid-1990s, we knew what we know today about climate, Kyoto would almost certainly not exist, because we would have concluded it was not necessary."

Lambert observing:

Because in the mid-1990s those computer climate models predicted that it would get warmer and now we know that those predictions were correct. So we shouldn't trust them and Kyoto is unnecessary. Are these guys even trying to be credible?

No, climate models shouldn't be trusted because they aren't accurate, or so says the British Antarctic Survey's Dr John Turner:

"Current climate model simulations don’t reproduce the observed warming, pointing to weaknesses in their ability to represent the Antarctic climate system. Our next step is to try to improve the models. "

In any event, Lambert's anti-discussion position was anticipated in a 2003 letter from scientists to the prospective Prime Minister Paul Martin:

We strongly believe that important environmental policy should be based on a strong foundation of environmental science. Censoring credible science out of the debate because it does not conform to a pre-determined political agenda is clearly not a responsible course of action for any government.

Maybe Lambert should stick to stuff he's actually good at like, you know, computer graphics.