Wednesday, January 18, 2012


cc: shackley_Simon,
date: Mon Dec 8 14:10:21 2003
from: Mike Hulme <>
subject: Re: Will Hutton's A-level essay
to: "Richard Starkey" <>

The McIntyre and McKitrick paper (MM03) has got a hidden agenda behind it. Check out this
web site for some commentary on it. As with the contentious Soon and Baliunas paper, MM03
has been published by Energy & Environment and is part of Sonja Christriansen-Boehmer's
on-going campaign.
So while not endorsing this attempt at undermining our basis for current exceptional global
warming, I must say I find myself in sympathy with much of what Will Hutton writes. In
particular his conclusion that the debate around climate change is fundamentally about
power and politics rather than the environment seems undeniable. There are not that many
"facts" about (the meaning of) climate change which science can unequivocally reveal.
I am copying this to Asher Minns, since Asher has been giving the issue of "sound science"
and Tyndall's reaction to it some thought recently.
At 11:37 08/12/2003 +0000, you wrote:

Dear Mike

Did you see Will Hutton s article in the Observer yesterday. See


An appalling article in my view. One of the key paras is

An important and neutral paper by Canadians Steven McIntyre and Ross McKitrick suggests
that the best guess is that, while temperatures are currently rising, they probably lie
within the range for the past 600 years. Environmentalists, just as in a battle over a
new runway, are being as partisan in their use of science as their opponents.

Do you know of these (neutral!!!!!!!!!) guys and their paper. Do they have
credibility? Is Hutton s interpretation correct?

I d like to do a reply but could do with some insight into the science.

Richard Starkey
Tyndall Centre for Climate Research
PO Box 88
Manchester M60 1QD

Tel: +44 (0) 161 200 3763 (direct)

No comments:

Post a Comment