"The climate change debate has been usurped by the 'exaggerated' and the 'deniers'," says physicist Richard A. Berkeley Muller. "It is time for scientists to return to put things in place: less distortion, more science."
In the midst of an ideological war on global warming, Professor Muller-author of "Physics for Future presidentes', has decided to stand in the middle and try even harder: to develop the most comprehensive, independent and 'final' on climate .
The study has been dubbed "The Berkeley Earth Project 'and aspires to be" a new starting point to set the record straight and try to build a consensus. " Muller, in a telephone conversation with the world, anticipates that the results will be ready in next April or May.
The Climate Change
"The scientist's work is to investigate, analyze results and in any case provide the information to the public to draw their own conclusions," says Muller. "Much of the problem has arisen at the time that scientists have tried to be too activist and have lost their credibility as researchers."
'Exaggerated' vs. 'Denial' adn the climate change.
In the bunch of 'exaggerated', Muller talks about everything from Al Gore, but has many more reservations about criticizing NASA climatologist James Hansen ("your work as a scientist has been very valid.") At the other end of the scale puts the 'deniers', who should not be confused with the 'skeptical' ("an appropriate dose of skepticism is always desirable in a scientist) and the ecology.
According to Muller, the tendency to distort climate science to incite to action "has seriously compromised the work of the UN Intergovernmental Panel (IPCC by its acronym in English). "I will be very difficult to regain credibility," he warns, "as long as the front Rajendra Pachauri."
Berkeley physicist intends to go even beyond the work done so far by the UN IPCC, by the NASA Goddard Institute or the UK Met Office, the three major global benchmarks, trapped in one way or another the "politicization" of climate science, especially after the publication of the emails from the University of West Anglia.
"We're not going to manipulate the findings, we find what we find," says Muller, who claims to be ranked along with many other scientists at an intermediate point of debate. "We are an independent, nonpartisan group. We will collect the data, we analyze and present the results.'ll Let people draw their conclusions."
The ecology and the Climate change
In the midst of an ideological war on global warming, Professor Muller-author of "Physics for Future presidentes', has decided to stand in the middle and try even harder: to develop the most comprehensive, independent and 'final' on climate .
The study has been dubbed "The Berkeley Earth Project 'and aspires to be" a new starting point to set the record straight and try to build a consensus. " Muller, in a telephone conversation with the world, anticipates that the results will be ready in next April or May.
The Climate Change
"The scientist's work is to investigate, analyze results and in any case provide the information to the public to draw their own conclusions," says Muller. "Much of the problem has arisen at the time that scientists have tried to be too activist and have lost their credibility as researchers."
'Exaggerated' vs. 'Denial' adn the climate change.
In the bunch of 'exaggerated', Muller talks about everything from Al Gore, but has many more reservations about criticizing NASA climatologist James Hansen ("your work as a scientist has been very valid.") At the other end of the scale puts the 'deniers', who should not be confused with the 'skeptical' ("an appropriate dose of skepticism is always desirable in a scientist) and the ecology.
According to Muller, the tendency to distort climate science to incite to action "has seriously compromised the work of the UN Intergovernmental Panel (IPCC by its acronym in English). "I will be very difficult to regain credibility," he warns, "as long as the front Rajendra Pachauri."
Berkeley physicist intends to go even beyond the work done so far by the UN IPCC, by the NASA Goddard Institute or the UK Met Office, the three major global benchmarks, trapped in one way or another the "politicization" of climate science, especially after the publication of the emails from the University of West Anglia.
"We're not going to manipulate the findings, we find what we find," says Muller, who claims to be ranked along with many other scientists at an intermediate point of debate. "We are an independent, nonpartisan group. We will collect the data, we analyze and present the results.'ll Let people draw their conclusions."
The ecology and the Climate change
With the support of the University of Berkeley (the 'laboratory' Energy Secretary Steven Chu), the study is being funded by groups of very diverse: from the Innovation Foundation for Climate and Energy Research (created by Bill Gates ) to the Charles Koch Foundation (linked to the oil magnate).
Richard Muller argues in any case the "autonomy" of the Earth Project has received funding on the grounds that "both the left and right" and trying to lend a ember researchers who have not taken a political party. His team included Professor of Statistics David Brillinger, climatologist of Georgia Institute of Technology Judith Curry, and physical Saul Perlmutter, Art Rosenfeld and Robert Jacobsen, University of Berkeley and the ecology.
According to Muller, the evaluation "independent" global warming may be used as a reference in the U.S. and worldwide, "although we assume that a minority opinion will never change even though the evidence is or is not on your side" .
"Can we reach the same conclusions as other groups, but we will do a new and different," says Berkeley driver of Earth Project. "If all we get is permir consensus on global warming-a true consensus, rather than one based on policy positions," it will be a major achievement. "
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario