Those who read this blog will know that while I am cautious about climate change arguments, I am not a climate change sceptic as such. However, I am very cautious about the way in which the now dominant view seems to be twisting analysis.
I caught the tail end of a radio program today that exactly expressed my concerns. The person interviewed apparently participated in the recent expert group process.
These international processes work by discussion and consensus, an apparently democratic process. He described the recent process as being like democracy in a one party state.
He suggested, a view that has apparently also been put forward by the head of the OECD's economics department, that there should be a team B, a scientific group whose role was to be sceptical, to look at alternative views.
I must say that this resonated with me. I would be a lot more comfortable if I could see all the arguments, if I did not feel that a dominant position was twisting the scientific debate.
Note I say scientific. The core of the debate is scientific and must be dealt with in that way.
I had to grin.
Now that Rupert Murdoch has decided to take News Corporation carbon neutral, I wondered how the climate sceptics on Mr Murdoch's Australian papers would react. I see that both Tim Blair and Piers Ackerman have reaffirmed their position notwithstanding the News' stance, although I thought that they were both a tad uncomfortable!