The emails and the ‘Danish Leak’ may kill Copenhagen and that is good news

Image: Les Humains Associes'

Michael Cosgrove opines on why the fierce debates on the emails and the leaked report could ironically be excellent news for those striving to improve the world’s climate.

"The debate on climate change does not belong to the political left or right, it is not a playground for scientists and their ideas, and it isn’t about being wrong or right or rich or poor."Many climatologists, scientists, politicians and commentators have noisily protested those interpretations of the contents of the leaked ‘Climategate’ emails which contend that scientists do not agree on what is happening to the climate.

They say that there is much less disagreement between scientists than is being inferred and that the content of their email correspondence has often been taken out of context. They are right, of course. But only up to a point.

One would have to be blind not to have read the many wildly divergent evaluations which have surfaced over the last few years concerning what is happening to the climate and why. But where’s the problem with those different evaluations? There is no shame in admitting that we do not understand everything and that there are limits to what we can predict with certainty.

On the contrary, one would have to be extremely naive to believe that climatologists and scientists know exactly what is happening and exactly what should be done about it, just as one would be naive not to understand that many scientists work for interest groups, whatever side of the debate they are on. That means that they are under pressure to produce the “right” results.

So any attempt by the scientific community to deny the existence of differing opinions and predictions will ultimately prove to be counter-productive and lead many people to suspect a cover-up. That in turn will mean that people will refuse to believe what facts there are because they could say that “They can’t even agree amongst themselves.”

Let’s welcome the fact that the scientists disagree. Let’s even encourage it. That will result in a healthier, more collaborative and realistic effort to combine evaluative efforts in order to reach the truth instead of the current situation which has led to a sterile and damaging debate about “who is right” within the scientific and politico/economic world. This state of affairs has also polarized public opinion, which chooses the analysis which “fits” best with their convictions.

The same goes for the “Danish leak.”

Developing countries have quite rightly reacted with furor to the contents of a document leaked to The Guardian which purports to contain the contents of a secret deal struck between richer countries which would give them more power to control the practical outcome of Copenhagen, kill Kyoto off for good and render the UN almost powerless to negotiate its demands.

The Danish leak may well be the final nail in the coffin of Copenhagen.

And that is very good news too.

It’s very good news because an honest approach to the climate debate is long overdue and these two episodes may just be what it takes to get things back on track.

The debate on climate change does not belong to the political left or right, it is not a playground for scientists and their ideas, and it isn’t about being wrong or right or rich or poor.

This episode should be seen as being a good opportunity to clear the air, and we must realize that the evidence on climate change and our manner of dealing with it are much less than perfect. That realization should lead us to finally decide to get down to addressing this crucial issue with a little more consensus and a lot less infighting and futile internecine spats.

I would gladly trade the step backwards from a failed summit for a real step forward which would finally lead to an open and common approach towards what is, after all, an issue of such importance that it transcends petty bickering and point-scoring.