CEO of the MET Office, John Hirst will be delivering the annual alumni lecture on Sat 6th Oct at Leeds University on the subject of :
Separating climate science from politics
What happens when politics strays into the examination and delivery of scientific evidence?
Science is science until its conclusions have an impact on people’s lives and livelihoods. At this point there are important political and economic judgements and decisions to be made.
All science should be challenged and any political debate on its implications should be lively but when politics stray into the examination and delivery of scientific evidence either in its support or undermining, there are dangers.
This lecture will explore the frontier of climate science and its implications – and where the science stops and the politics and economics starts.
This should be good. I have a couple of questions in mind for my fellow Leeds Alumnus, one that I have culled form the short blog post by Richard North reproduced below. Try to book a place and come along, the more the merrier. TB.
Posted by Richard North Friday, February 05, 2010
Talking of “powerful vested interests”, it is interesting to see how much we, the taxpayers, are and have been paying those dedicated public servants at the Met Office to study climate change.
That is a cool £218,812,306, paid in addition to the basic overhead payments. And on top of that, there are many millions more paid for specific research projects – the total funding declared by DEFRA amounting to £243,620,197.
These sums, themselves, are a tiny proportion of the overall money extracted from our pockets, to pay for the government’s obsession with global warming. The problem is that the payments are spread between so many different groups, and made by so many different departments, that it is very difficult to put an overall figure on it.
Of one thing, I am certain, however, the total – over term – runs to many billions. These sums here are just the tip of the iceberg. We could have bought our aircraft carriers, with change to spare, from the amount of money frittered away on climate change.