Prof. Abraham is at it again
He's got stick-to-it-iveness, you've got to give him that. He's got a new article in The Guardian titled: "Fossil fuel funded report denies the expert global warming consensus" and swith a sub-heading: "The infamous Heartland Institute has distributed to elected officials a nonsense, non-science report full of denial"
And he's actually quite right in one way. Who can deny that global Warming is the scientific orthodoxy these days? We skeptics are certainly well aware of it. The amusing thing is that he goes to great length to prove it -- starting with Oreskes, through Anderegg to John Cook -- though Cook's finding that two thirds of climate scientists took no position on global warming he carefully glides over.
But the whole point of his article is to rebut a Heartland Institute report that criticizes global warming and the only thing that a real scientist would be interested in there would be the climate facts. What are the facts that rebut the Heartland claims? Scientific questions are decided by the facts, not by opinions.
And he does finally get there, sort of. Out of the 20 or so paragraphs in his article, two do address climate facts. Here they are:
"While I won’t spend too much time on the scientifically incorrect or misleading statements in the Heartland report, I will mention a few. In chapter 4, they claim that a doubling of carbon dioxide would result in approximately 1°C warming. They neglected to remind the readers that we have nearly already reached that and we are nowhere near doubling of carbon dioxide yet. The report claims that meteorological observations are consistent with a climate sensitivity of 1°C but they provide no support for this assertion and in fact, the research does not support this.
But even Wikipedia says: ""Without any feedbacks, a doubling of CO2 (which amounts to a forcing of 3.7 W/m2) would result in 1 °C global warming, which is easy to calculate and is undisputed.". Dear me, Prof. Abraham, it seems that Heartland are the orthodox ones on that! But let us go on:
The report falsely claims that climate models assume all the warming since the industrial revolution is from carbon dioxide. Climate models include many factors in addition to carbon dioxide. The report also falsely claims that models do not attempt to simulate internal climate oscillations. They claim that thawing of permafrost is not likely to emit dangerous methane, which will add to the warming, but they give no evidence to support their claim."
I haven't read the Heartland report but it is true that the Siberian methane scare is widely reported and believed. But here is an academic journal article which has studied the question -- and found minimal effect of such emissions. Naughty Prof. Abraham has not kept up with the literature on his subject! No wonder he was reluctant to talk about the facts.
The man is a clown. My previous comment on him is here. One of Lord Monckton's scathing comments on Abraham is here