"Above that a hellish vision opens up of widespread floods and droughts, with millions of refugees roaming the world in search of food as ecosystems collapse and forests die of drought."The full lead article is here.
And lest they don't print my response sent to them today I include it below. Meanwhile look at this letter to the Economist. This time the drivel is called astrology and the reposte is from Matt Ridley the science writer.
Now here is my much less well written letter to The Herald. Which I bet they won't publish.
So the Herald backs the Met Office view! ("Politicians must take a long-term view for the sake of the planet" Editorial, November 6.)
I don't ask you to abandon your alarmism ("hellish vision. . . of widespread floods and droughts" etc. etc. etc.) because of the snow, unprecedented in recent memory, falling over much of Scotland.
Nor should you abandon it because immediate action to forestall catastrophic climate change is losing traction as more countries back down from Kyoto and similar fine words.
I suggest you review the science. There are many brilliant scientists, whose views are not welcome in the Met Office, World Meteorological Association or the IPCC, for whom the alarmism you embrace so wholeheartedly is not based on good science.
Review the science and you will find hype based on shoddy science and huge uncertainties.
The Met Office fail from time to time on short term predictions and rather more often on medium term ones (remember the 'barbecue summer'?).
As happened immediately before Copenhagen last year, their politically opportunistic interventions (which you claim are 'evenhanded') simply erode their credibility further, as they struggle to present a scientific basis for their long term predictions.
Cllr Cameron Rose 6.12.10