First Britain, now the east coast of the United States have been ground to a halt by
heavy snowfalls. Global warming sceptics are having a field day amidst fiercely cold temperatures in many parts of Northern Europe and North America.
But global warming advocates are fighting back in the bibles of global warming belief, notably the Daily Politics' favourite eco-enthusiast and (director of seasonal forecasting at an atmospheric and environmental research firm) in the New York Times -- both arguing that this winter's cold snaps and heavy snowfalls are actually being caused by global warming.
I'll leave readers to make up their own minds once they've perused the articles and confine myself to one comment: they may be right but it is not what the global warming establishment told us 10 years ago.
Consider this from another global warming bible, , (March 20, 2000), when the IPCC was gearing up to get us all to take global warming seriously:
"
... the warming is so far manifesting itself more in winters which are less cold than in much hotter summers. According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia [the epicentre of global warming research], within a few years winter snowfall will become "a very rare and exciting event". Children just aren't going to know what snow is."
Much of the debate about global warming is hard for non-scientists like myself to follow but you don't need even an GCSE in science to know that that prediction -- common a decade ago -- turned out to be plain wrong. Global warmers can't tell us in one year that man-made global warming will make snow scarce, then a few years later claim it explains why there is so much snow now.
Both explanations can't be right, I'd suggest.
Permit me to make one more non-scientific observation: as a sometime resident of New York and regular visitor there (I've just come back) for over 30 years I remember the city being regularly hit by snow blizzards. Not so long ago (early in the past decade) I recall waking up one February morning to a tremendous snow storm which had dumped almost two feet of snow in Central Park and closed all the airports. Bit like New York this week.
So I'm not sure the current dump proves things either way ...
British commentary on
WikiLeaks has zoomed in on the uncomplimentary remarks the Governor of the Bank of England made about
David Cameron and George Osborne when in Opposition.
But there is nothing exceptional about an established governor like Mervyn King worrying in private about the inexperience of the leading figures in a likely incoming government. I'm much more worried about the economic forecasts he gave the Americans, in which he seems to have been consistently wrong.
He told the US Ambassador, for example, that global recovery would be "anaemic" in 2010. Wrong. It has been, according to the IMF, a robust 5%.
He warned there was a high risk of a double dip recession. Wrong. Even Labour doesn't claim that any more -- just that growth will be a little lower in 2011 and 2012 than it would have been without the cuts.
He also predicted that the private sector would not pick up the public sector slack when it came to jobs, claiming "businesses will cut jobs faster this year", including the elimination of part-time jobs. Double wrong. The private sector has created around 300,000 new jobs this year -- far more than the public sector loss of jobs -- and about 50% of them have been part-time.
Remember, these mis-forecasts come from a governor who has already a dubious record in predicting inflation, consistently telling us that inflation figures at least 50% higher than the 2% target he is meant to hit were just a blip -- except that this blip is now almost three years old and in his latest forecast he's been forced to concede that the "blip" is likely to last all of 2011 too.
The US embassy clearly placed great store on the governor's forecasts, judging by the diplomatic traffic they generated back to Washington. Since nothing he seems to have told them turned out to be right, I'm not sure how soon the Americans will be picking up the tab for lunch with Mr King in 2011.
PS Just before I began my interview with John Prescott last week, he brandished a letter from a senior Japanese official which he said showed that Tokyo was backing him to bring a new agreement on global warming. His lordship then departed for Cancun, where agreement on anything binding looks elusive, to say the least. Indeed, the Japanese have just announced that they will not continue with the Kyoto protocols beyond 2012.
Japan's chief cabinet secretary, Yoshito Sengoku, has told reporters in Cancun that Tokyo would "sternly oppose debate for extending the Kyoto Protocol into a second phase which is unfair and ineffective." Given that Kyoto was signed in Japan and that John Prescott regards it as something he saved at the last minute, you might regard this as a double blow. Tune in towards the end of the week when we'll try to establish exactly what Cancun has achieved. Meanwhile wrap and stay warm -- another Big Freeze is on its way.
NOTE: Comments are invited on this blog for the next three days, but please keep them relevant to what Andrew has to say as off-topic comments will be removed. General comments about the Daily Politics can be sent to our via this .
