See also: Poll on name
Introduction
Following some comments, I have been mulling over (again) the possibility of some kind of sceptic organisation in Scotland to help put the case for scepticism on the exaggerated claims of manmade global warming.
Paradoxically, this blog was started in the hope it might galvanise a group of sceptics to form such an organisation. But we are an awkward lot. We are the type of individuals who are not behove to any social “consensus” so we are naturally sceptical of organisations that try to represent our views as some sort of “consensus”.
So, I started looking at some organisation constitutions in the hope these would inspire me:
- NAME
The name of the group shall be [Add name], hereafter referred to as the
Group. - OBJECTS
The objects of the Group shall be:
– to improve
– to encourage
– to foster
Name
The obvious name is “Scottish Sceptics” or “association of Scottish Sceptics”. Unfortunately, there is already a group of “Scottish Skeptics”. So what about “Scottish Sceptics of Anthropomorphicallyonous Global Warming”. OK, I do let my own bias against unnecessary complex names show through, but even if we could agree on a term for “manmade”, we would then be sceptical of something which has a scientific basis as there is a sound basis for believing CO2 does cause SOME warming.
So, then we start needing to be specific: Association of Scottish Sceptics of exaggerated claims of anthro.. Global warming ” it just gets too long winded.
Objects
So, perhaps we should consider the objects first?
To improve … climate science? More like chop it up and start again.
To encourage … honesty in climate science and proper respect for evidence that contradicts the consensus?
To foster … a revolution in science that does away with the eco-nutters who seem to be running it?
But seriously, the objects need to be positive, and it is difficult to think of positive objectives. What is it we want?
- The adherence to the scientific method. Evidence based science (I can’t believe I just wrote that!)
- Impartiality in the science: equality of access to publication, to funding
- A dogged determination to root out bigotry of opposing views and a ruthless push to (improve then) maintain standards.
- Scientifically based methods in forecasting and predictions of effects of those forecasts.
On that basis I might suggest something like the “Scottish Association for Scientific Climate predictions”.
Scope
What is the scope?
- Geography: Scotland.
- Area of interest: Climate, climate science, climate predictions and economic and social predictions based on climate predictions.
Method of operation/ practical aims
- To create a website repository of reliable information.
- To disseminate that information to others
- To encourage and support its members in the dissemination of that information throughout Scottish Society by way of internet forums, meetings.
- Direct action: storms of sceptics will attack the parliament projecting semi compacted crystals of de-energised dihydrogen monoxide.
It’s a start … Comments Welcome!
Addendum – Why?
The following from the Scottish Parliament’s MSP’s code of conduct should explain:
5.1.5 In addition, members should:
• consider whether a meeting with one group which is making representations on an issue should be balanced by offering another group with different views an opportunity to make representations;
Note it does not say: “individuals” but says “groups”. In order to push the button given to us under that section, we need some form of group. This is not only for our benefit, it is also for theirs: as a properly organised group will present the information they need in a considered and easily digested manner and e.g. make it easier to follow up if there are further questions. It also allows them to know the “consensus” of that group without themselves having to meet with all the individuals of that persuasion to find what (if anything) they have in common in their views.
Your welcome to get in touch with a similiar group in Australia to save you starting from scratch
Galileomovement.com.au also on Facebook and Twitter
Cheers
Paul Evans
Thank you for the offer.
I think we first have to have a conversation about what people might want such an organisation to do in Scotland. We already have very high profile sceptics in Scotland, but I suspect that under the surface we have very different aims. It’s a terrible prospect, but we have to find a “consensus”.
Also, I don’t want to create a monster: an organisation that becomes an end in itself consuming vast amounts of our limited resource. It’s got to support the work of the many dedicated sceptics not add to that workload.
Paul,
do you have a constitution you could send me?
Mike (mikesnaturetrick [hat] haseler.net)
Mike, the closest they have to a constitution is a statement of purpose
http://galileomovement.com.au/who_we_are.php
Hope it helps. They hav been doing some great work directly challenging alarmist politicians and scientists (?), leading public rallies, producing flyers and getting th messages out via their website, Facebook and Twitter.
Best of luck, contact them directly via their website if you would like to know more.
Regards
Paul Evans
Paul, thanks. My feeling is that we need to be a “constituted” group in order to make our case under the Scottish MSPs code of conduct:
from the MSP’s code of conduct will explain why:
5.1.5 In addition, members should:
• consider whether a meeting with one group which is making representations on an issue should be balanced by offering another group with different views an opportunity to make representations;
I suggest not formally limiting it to “climate science”. Firstly that makes you look like a specilist lobby and secondly there are a number of other “environmental” scare stories from GM to nuclear power to peak oil to passive smoking worthy of a good kicking. If CAGW is dying the ecofascists will move on to a new scare and we should be on their heels.
I’ve been to the “Scottish Skeptics” who are militantly unsceptical on alarmism. But they have shown how to put on good meetings and I would be willing to participate in something similar. We could offer to engage in a public debate on the subject and put it on YouTube if anybody is technologically up to that.
Good idea. Our little country may have the distinction of having the most absurd and extravagant climate/CO2-scare related policies in place. As such it is on the frontier of CO2-induced policy-making, and it is, and has been I suspect, a particular focus for multinational corporations such as the WWF who make a good living out of scaring people, not least our hapless politicals.
John, I’ve not seen your site before and can I say that I am constantly astonished by the work put in by sceptics (like yourself) .
Thanks, its worth considering. The common theme seems to be predicting the social and economic effects of science. My concern would be that we need a consensus on what we agree on, and if we widen the scope too far into other contentious areas, the chances are that we will find it difficult to achieve the necessary consensus to make the group effective.
Climate is worldwide. It doesn’t just affect Scotland. A good relatively fair group that does consider scientific evidence is the Cambridge Conference Network run by Dr Benny Peiser of John Moores University in Liverpool. I don’t really see the need for a purely Scottish group but best wishes anyway. – Andy Nimmo.
Good point. My rationale was that we need to focus the energy of the Sceptics at the Scottish Parliament.
I would e.g. like to develop some literature to send to all the MSPs, start emailing them and asking for meetings. I think a group based here will have more success in the Scottish political environment – if it can be organised.
I suggest not formally limiting it to “climate science”. Firstly that makes you look like a specilist lobby and secondly there are a number of other “environmental” scare stories from GM to nuclear power to peak oil to passive smoking worthy of a good kicking. If CAGW is dying the ecofascists will move on to a new scare and we should be on their heels.
A sort of Tartan Right Wing Wank Tank?
[SR, that’s not very pleasant … more important, it’s likely to provoke similar comments directed at you, I have however left it in as I can’t see a way to make your point without deleting it (and it is mildly funny), but I hope no one rises to the bait.]
There is a meeting of the “Glasgow Skeptics” on Thurs 7.00 pm at Walkabout 128 Renfield St at which there is a lecture equating creationsim with “Deniers”. As I have already said they do run quite good meetings and we could perhaps learn from them. I intend to be there and ask a polite question about what actual evidence of catastrophic warming proves that the comparison should not be of the creationists with the warming catastrophists? If anybody sensible is going to be there we might share a pint afterwards.
I’d definitely call it “Global Warming” rather than “climate change” – the original name will say it all when the winter sets in!
This is a great idea – we need one south of the border too. We need to make people angry that their money is being wasted, and their electricity supply put at risk in such a daft way!
Personally I am not going to start it (though I would join) as I am amazed at the level of aggression that seems to be directed towards people that question AGW!
When I was in CND (I still am, but inactive) we found that a block of leaflets comes pretty cheap, and then put them through people’s doors. Anything that forces the politicians to explain this nonsense to ordinary people will help – particularly the fact that the UK contribution is a drop in the ocean, and most other countries are rapidly cooling to global warming!
Scottish Association Of Rationally Sceptical Advocates? (Agents/Agitators)
Name needs a bit of work, but a great acronym.
BTW – John Shade: great site, why haven’t I heard of you before? I’ve added you to my blogroll.
Make an annual pilgrimage to the statue of David Hume in Edinburgh.
May I suggest a candidate name could be:-
Scottish Association Recognising Climate Alarmism Scares Many.
Its acronym sums things up.
Association of Scottish Sceptics??? Who wants to be known as an ‘ASS’??? lol
people in every country facing this madness (some ideas are sensible, we all know which) need to be made aware of the future hits they are going to have to accommodate & MSM seem to have no clue or are conveniently forgetting to mention to joe public, so I’ll sign up mike.
a scot born 1957 in the Lothian’s, seen some bad winters & hot summers & the opposite, now live on isle of man, but same green energy madness is heading our way also.
“To be sceptical assumes there is a strong presumptive case, but you have your doubts. I think were dealing with a situation where there’s not a strong presumptive case.”
Scottish Climate Realists
To me the above is more relevant, since the only justifiable stance is agnostic realism. The IPCC proposition and forcasts of ‘dangerous manmade warming’ appear to be completely falsified by much of the scientific research in the last few years, so there’s nothing really to be sceptical of.
Just my tuppence worth . . . . maybe campaigning for a repeal of the the Scottish climate change act is a most worthy cause, it appears to be way more draconian than the UK monstrosity.
From R.J.Price
I am very interested in your attempt to create a Scottish Sceptics Association. I am a retired academic (formerly Reader in Physical Geography at Glasgow University). My research interests were the magnitude and frequency of environmental changes in Scotland, Alaska and Iceland. Over the past decade I have followed the scientific debate about Global warming and am convinced that the perceived 20th century warming is within the range of natural variation of the climate.I would like to correspond with you regarding the aims of your new Association. Please send me your postal address- yes some of us oldies still write letters!