The climate change panic

I'm the first to admit that climate change science is not my specialist subject, all I just want is a balanced and open debate, which in my previous post I have argued is not happening.

What's intriguing about the CRU email scandal is not only the complete silence from politicians but the response by the climate change advocates. They range from the emotional and aggressive 'because I picked the wrong horse to back'' response to the wriggling.

Prime contender in the wriggling department is Will Heaven in the Telegraph. Nearly a week ago he wrote this article provocatively titled:

Climategate won't make global warming go away, despite what Delingpole tells you

Heaven went onto to say and note the tone:

Imagine a Premier League of cranks and conspiracy theorists. Who do you reckon would top it? It’s a tough call. I think Holocaust deniers would lift the cup, with 9/11 truthers not far behind. But there’s a new lot on the rise, recently promoted from Division One: global warming sceptics.

In the comments he further adds (my emphasis in bold):

I just want to clarify something about my comparison of climate change deniers to 9/11 truthers, which I gather may have caused some offence: I meant it.

Today though the tone is different:

but it’s surely a bad move to strangle the debate.

and:

So we shouldn’t condemn David Davis and Nigel Lawson for questioning policy – science informs, but it doesn’t decide.

Someone's wriggling!