Climate Science and the Phlogiston Theory
On 2 February 2007 the Intergovernmental Governmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC) released a “Summary for Policymakers” which is a precis – written by its representatives, not all of whom were scientists – of its longer report, due for release in May. Drafts of the as-yet unpublished main report have been widely circulated and prompted much comment but views which differ from that of the IPCC and the main authors have been largely neglected. In response to the SPM ten scientists presented an alternative report based on the IPCC's draft document and this Independent Summary for Policymakers (ISPM) was released in London on February 5. The ISPM notes the limited level of knowledge of climate sciences and comments on hypotheses neglected by the IPCC SPM, and not surprisingly its conclusions contradict those of the IPCC. The rather alarmist IPCC SPM claims that it is between 90% and 95% probable that the observed climate change since 1950 has mainly been caused by mankind and in particular by the emission of CO2 produced by the burning of fossil fuel. In contrast the ISPM states that the extent to which humans are contributing to climate change is uncertain and will remain uncertain for some time. The ISPM also points out that that the observed climate changes are still within the limits of natural variability and can be explained by natural events, and suggests that some warming might be beneficial. This paper considers this controversy from the perspective of the history of science and shows precendents for questioning science orthodoxy.