Cnutism

I notice that the Twitter-sphere is alight with angry voices after Tory grandee Nigel Lawson appeared with Brian Hoskins (PHD climatologist) on radio 4 this morning to talk about climate change. You can listen to the programme here, but the opinions expressed by Lawson were predictably like the sediment deposited in people's homes by the Thames this week, i.e. stubbornly immoveable and malodorous. On the whole I don't think people are upset that Lord Lawson holds such anti-science, anti-evidence views, he is after all entitled to hold whatever opinions he chooses and is (fortunately for us) not accountable to the general public any longer. The problem people seem to have is that he was presented by the BBC as a credible voice to counter the cautious, reasoned views of a life-long climate scientist and world renowned expert in the field. No mention was made that Lawson has precisely zero qualifications in this area and is funded to make noise by the industries that stand to lose the most from changes in government policy on green initiatives like wind and solar power generation. Regardless of the evidence for man-made climate change (and there is lots) and regardless of your political leanings surely it makes better strategic sense (from the point of view of sustainable economic growth and security) to be investing in new forms of power generation technology and to lead those fields rather than focus on shaving ever leaner fillets from the rotting carcass of big oil? Seeking sound information on climate from lobbyists like Lawson is rather like seeking recommendations for Christmas lunch from turkeys, you have to ask yourself, who stands to gain most from avoiding the issue?