Exclusive: Bestselling “Climate Confusion” author talks with Chilling Effect!

TCE: Both presidential candidates have bought in to the idea that climate change poses a serious planetary threat and both have advocated aggressive political action that will have high associated costs. If you could select one item of scientific evidence to present to the candidates that you think best disproves the global warming hype what would it be?

Spencer: I would show them the huge disconnect between the models, which are highly sensitive and produce a lot of warming, and the actual observations published by a number of researchers over the years, which strongly suggest that these climate models are seriously in error.

Sadly the presidential candidates are relying far too much on the reports by the IPCC, a body which has used sloppy science to further specific political and policy goals. It also unfortunate that several professional societies in the U.S. have made political statements in support of the IPCC.

I find it astounding that the IPCC has ignored the potential role of natural climate variability in global warming. In any other realm of science we are careful to look for alternative explanations for some phenomenon…but today, mankind is the only allowable reason for climate change.

I predict that the IPCC experience will end up being the worst case of scientific malpractice in history. Not that the scientists are at fault, I think they have just been led around by some politically savvy, almost charismatic, leaders.

If the new President and Congress are not careful, the resulting ‘sub-prime science meltdown’ we are headed for will have caused carbon dioxide regulations which will make the current financial crisis seen puny in comparison.