Morality, or more likely the glaring absence of it, is likely to figure prominently if future generations survive to assess issues surrounding 21st century climate change. The ethical debate will be multi-pronged.

- If it is ultimately proven that humanity’s lack of prudence is a causal factor in global warming, one ethical consideration will be causal.  

- Another may dwell upon solutions, such as the audacious suggestion by Paul Crutzen of Germany's Max Planck Institute for Chemistry. He proposed that the entire globe’s warming could be delayed by injecting massive quantities of sulfur particles into the stratosphere.

- A third area of concern is fundamental. It involves the data that is justifying an assembly of world leaders in Copenhagen next month. They are convening in a desperate attempt to avert the dire calamities that await all forms of life on Earth if climate models and statistical trends are not immediately reversed. An ethical problem is brewing as evidence of professional improprieties of leading climate scientists is exposed, effectively destroying the reliability of the evidence.

Next month I am scheduled to give a talk at a conference entitled 'The Art Work between Technology and Nature' at Statens Museum for Kunst, Copenhagen. Artists are gathering to assess COP15 United Nations Climate Change Conference Copenhagen. My presentation will deal with ethical dilemmas related to climate currently confronting governments, corporations, religious leaders, educators, and consumers. But I did not anticipate adding ‘scientists’ to this list.

 Today, Lorrie Goldstein, a columnist for the Toronto Sun, posted devastating evidence that the data that has been summoned as proof of warming reflects “botch after botch after botch”. This accusatory phrase is not Goldstein’s. It is taken from a leaked computer file revealing the specifics of how leading climate scientists did "tricks" with the data to "hide the decline" in global temperatures. The 274 page file describes the efforts of a climatologist/programmer at the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia to update a huge climate database between 2006 and 2009. The programmer admitted to inventing data to fill in gaps caused by bug-infected programs. This person also reported that operators assigned false World Meteorological Organization codes, allowing “bad databases to pass unnoticed, and good databases to become bad ..." (98-9).  

This document can be downloaded at  www.anenglishmanscastle.com/HARRY_READ_Me.txt.

The CRU at East Anglia University is a leading climate research agency. Its mathematical models were incorporated into the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's 2007 report. This report is the basis for the Environmental Protection Agency relies upon in making its recommendation.

I am not knowledgeable enough to assess the implications of this revelation, or to consider them in relation to other indicators of global warming such as radiation balance and atmospheric and ocean chemistry. Nonetheless, the mere suggestion of scientific irregularities is a reminder that environmental decisions are more likely to be judicious if we remain watchful and skeptical than if we yield to consensus. This, in itself, is an ethical stance.

Be first to comment this article

Only registered users can write comments.
Please login or register.

Powered by AkoComment Tweaked Special Edition v.1.4.6
AkoComment © Copyright 2004 by Arthur Konze - www.mamboportal.com
All right reserved