TABLE OF CONTENTS As has been observed before, the IPCC projections are the result of a combination of economic models and climate models. In earlier chapters both sorts of models have been criticised. In this chapter we will again focus on the economic models. This time we will deal with the criticism of two well-reputed scientists who were newcomers to the debate. They were totally unconscious of the trench warfare which was going on in the field of global warming, and could not possibly be suspected of being prejudiced in one way or the other.
| Question: | How can science prove that the apocalypse will happen in a century from now? |
| Answer: | Use models, introduce some small biases in the beginning and because of the logic of compounded interest one will surely end up with the apocalypse in due time. |
| Question: | Has this approach already been successful in the past? |
| Answer: | Yes, very successful indeed! According to the first Report to the Club of Rome, we should have been in the middle of the apocalypse by now. |
| Question: | Why should one want to alarm the public in that way? |
| Answer: | Just to refresh the memory of the reader, Stephan Schneider, a prominent spokesman for the Intergovern- mental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) provides the answer: On the one hand, we are ethically bound to the scientific method, in effect promising to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but which means that we must include all the doubts, caveats, ifs, and buts. |
