Climatologists are no Einsteins, says his successor
Freeman Dyson is a physicist who has been teaching at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton since Albert Einstein was there. When Einstein died in 1955, there was an opening for the title of « most brilliant physicist on the planet. » Dyson has filled it.
So when the global-warming movement came along, a lot of people wondered why he didn’t come along with it. The reason he’s a skeptic is simple, the 89-year-old Dyson said when I phoned him. « I think any good scientist ought to be a skeptic, » Dyson said.
« I just think they don’t understand the climate, » he said of climatologists. « Their computer models are full of fudge factors. » « The models are extremely oversimplified, » he said. « They don’t represent the clouds in detail at all. They simply use a fudge factor to represent the clouds. »
Dyson said his skepticism about those computer models was borne out by recent reports of a study by Ed Hawkins of the University of Reading in Great Britain that showed global temperatures were flat between 2000 and 2010 — even though we humans poured record amounts of CO-2 into the atmosphere during that decade.
So why does the public hear only one side of this debate? Because the media do an awful job of reporting it. « They’re absolutely lousy, » he said of American journalists. « That’s true also in Europe. I don’t know why they’ve been brainwashed. »
Depuis quelque temps, de plus en plus de scientifiques osent remettre en doute la théorie du GIEC sur les changements climatiques.