In his letter (Science is never settled — really?) N. Roulston demonstrates news versus classic Groupthink behaviour.
I am frankly appalled that it is considered acceptable that “children are taught scientific truths established beyond doubt by giants of the scientific world”.
One might argue that former US Vice-President Al Gore is one such giant.
Between January and March 2007 the Blair government arranged for copies of Gore’s award-winning film An Inconvenient Truth to be sent to all UK secondary schools.
In September 2007 a school governor took the UK Government to the High Court, where it was ruled that the film was misleading in nine respects and that the guidance notes drafted by the Education Secretary’s advisors served only to exacerbate the political propaganda in the film.
The government had to amend their guidance notes to Teachers to make clear that the film is a political work and promotes only one side of the argument.
The problem is that the film went global and many would have taken it as factual and still believe it to this day, despite the clear political agenda.
Regarding the 2006 BBC secret seminar, a Welsh pensioner made a Freedom of Information request for the list of attendees.
At the resulting tribunal the BBC spent more than £20,000 of our money on barristers’ fees to prevent the names being released.
They lost the case, however, and the names were finally revealed and can be found across the internet.
Of the 28 “giants of the scientific world” labelled as “experts”, only eight appear to have any scientific training or qualifications.
The remainder comprised a theologist, two historians, an Egyptologist, and two engineers, a representative of the US Embassy, a TV multimedia producer, a communications coordinator, an insurance industry consultant, a journalist and commentator, a political economist and experts on global justice and human rights.
Also, a Human Environmental Studies graduate, two political sociologists, a disaster risk reduction advisor, a sustainability consultant and two climate activists.
It would seem that they reached political rather than scientific concensus. — C. SOUTHGATE, via email.
