[Phil Jones, Nov '08] Most governments around the world have signed up to Kyoto, and it is likely that the US will engage much more readily in many processes after Jan 20, 2009.
The UK has a climate change bill which seeks to reduce emissions by 80% by 2050, and to produce national risk assessments every 5 years. To almost all in government circles (including the US from Jan 20, 2009), the science is done and dusted. The reporting of climate stories within the media (especially the BBC) is generally one-sided, i.e. the counter argument is rarely made. There is, however, still a vociferous and small majority of climate change skeptics (also called deniers, but these almost entirely exclude any climate-trained climate scientists) who engage the public/govt/media through web sites. Mainstream climate science does not engage with them, and most of these skeptics/deniers do not write regular scientific papers in peer-review journals. The project would address the
division through the reporting (in mainstream media and bloggs) of a number (to be decided but 3-5) recent scientific papers. Issues to be addressed include:should a vociferous minority be able to bully mainstream scientists?; should mainstream climate scientists have to change the way they have worked for generations (through the peer-review literature)? and should the science be conducted across blogg sites?
Reviewing EPR, a "sleeping beauty" paper
3 hours ago