Who is Nigel Lawson? And is he a climate change "expert"

Thu, 2009-12-03 10:01Kevin Grandia
Kevin Grandia's picture

Who is Nigel Lawson? And is he a climate change "expert"

Nigella Lawson

The name Nigel Lawson has been popping up a lot lately on climate change issues. Especially around the recent CRU stolen email controversy.

Our research team has completed a full background briefing on Mr. Lawson. You can check out the entire backgrounder here: Who is Nigel Lawson?

Here’s some of the highlights:

Climate Change Expert?

According to a search of Google Scholar, Lawson has not published any work in the area of climate science.

Climate Contrarian Family

Climate skepticism runs deep in the Lawson family.  His son Dominic Lawson is a journalist for the British newspaper The IndependentDominic Lawson has used his columns to question the science behind climate change and criticize the IPCC.  Ironically, Dominic Lawson is married to Rosa Monckton, the sister of the infamous climate denier Christopher Monckton.

The Global Warming Policy Foundation

In 2009, Nigel Lawson founded a climate change think tank, The Global Warming Policy Foundation.  Although the organization presents itself as an independent and unbiased voice, it clearly has an agenda which is expressed loudly in its mission statement:  “our main purpose is to bring reason, integrity and balance to a debate that has become seriously unbalanced, irrationally alarmist, and all too often depressingly intolerant.”

Comments

In related news, the soon-to-be-out-of-print Washington Times published a front page story titled "Global warming controversy reaches NASA climate data." The article described how a "U.S. researcher" from the Competitive Enterprise Institute has been unable to get NASA to release some data he wants. And what is this "researcher's" credentials?

He's a lawyer.

I'm not a Doctor, but if my Doctor tells me I have some kind of illness, I look it up, I research treatment options, get all the information I can and I make my own treatment decisions.

We're all the patient here. Don't hide stuff from us because we aren't Doctors.

I am a doctor, but I am not an open heart surgeon. Hence I leave my fingers from that.

Why not give it a shot? What have you got to lose, the world will be flooded in a couple of months anyways.

Denialists have for years claiming that they can't get data from researchers when the data is publicly available. In the few cases they can't get the data publicly, they bother the wrong people for it as some data can't be released with permission, and the people who get asked aren't the owners of the data. The denialists playing these games know this, of course, but publicly claim they are being rebuffed.

The biggest problem is that the is a well-funded movement out there to disseminate lies to confuse people. Since most of us can't tell good science from bad, the science ends up looking far less certain than it is. It's the "smoking doesn't cause cancer" industry-funded PR campaign all over again.

Then tell me what is the lawyer's climate illness and why I should give a damn about his prescription?

You don't have to care about the lawyers opinion, but why not let him have one? Why not let him express his opinion even - and then you can question is qualifications if you want.

(sorry - I put this comment in the wrong spot - should have been down one)

Like everyone, he's entitled to his opinions. But he possesses no skills, knowledge or training to conduct climate research and present anything from that information as "fact."

Don't you love the Alarmist circular logic. Everyone is too stupid to understand global warming but us, so you should listen to us and only us on this issue. Their is a scientific consensus on global warming as we have excluded all other dissenting opinions.

And the PR Circle goes around and around.

Nigel lawson has credibility on the issue. Convince him of the alarmist rhetoric and you've probably convinced the other half of the globe to go along with the carbon crazy credit card scheme.

Now, apply this language to a publication in Nature or Science. Such a paper would not be published. Go figure, why.

Fact: Data is available
Denialists Claim it's withheld

Fact: Techniques are published in scientific journals
Denialists claim it's hidden

Fact: Scientists publish science in peer-reviewed journals
Denialists Publish pseudo-science mostly in Energy & Environment

Nigel Lawson has written several unremarkable books:

An Appeal to Reason: A Cool Look at Global Warming by Nigel Lawson
The Nigel Lawson Diet Book
The View from No.11: Memoirs of a Tory Radical

He has also co-authored other books.
It is reasonable to assume that without any demonstrable qualifications or fact-based knowledge concerning the climate, he should be ignored.

Lawson's book about the climate is excellent – if all you want is a book about a scientific subject that merely repeats extensively debunked denialists' bogus claims and avoids any actual science.

The denialists are so desperate, they'd believe a talking dog if it said climate science is a left-wing hoax!

People in the higher echelons of society obviously have interests in the green revolution not messing up their cash cows.

This guy obviously knows little about the problem but has been sent in to dampen down the message as much as possible.

Immigration