A Scottish Sceptic Organisation

See also: Poll on name

Introduction

Following some comments, I have been mulling over (again) the possibility of some kind of sceptic organisation in Scotland to help put the case for scepticism on the exaggerated claims of manmade global warming.

Paradoxically, this blog was started in the hope it might galvanise a group of sceptics to form such an organisation. But we are an awkward lot. We are the type of individuals who are not behove to any social “consensus” so we are naturally sceptical of organisations that try to represent our views as some sort of “consensus”.

So, I started looking at some organisation constitutions in the hope these would inspire me:

1. NAME
   The name of the group shall be [Add name], hereafter referred to as the
   Group.
2. OBJECTS
   The objects of the Group shall be:
   – to improve
   – to encourage
   – to foster

Name

The obvious name is “Scottish Sceptics” or “association of Scottish Sceptics”. Unfortunately, there is already a group of “Scottish Skeptics”. So what about “Scottish Sceptics of Anthropomorphicallyonous Global Warming”. OK, I do let my own bias against unnecessary complex names show through, but even if we could agree on a term for “manmade”, we would then be sceptical of something which has a scientific basis as there is a sound basis for believing CO2 does cause SOME warming.

So, then we start needing to be specific: Association of Scottish Sceptics of exaggerated claims of anthro.. Global warming ” it just gets too long winded.

Objects

So, perhaps we should consider the objects first?

To improve … climate science? More like chop it up and start again.

To encourage … honesty in climate science and proper respect for evidence that contradicts the consensus?

To foster … a revolution in science that does away with the eco-nutters who seem to be running it?

But seriously, the objects need to be positive, and it is difficult to think of positive objectives. What is it we want?

1. The adherence to the scientific method. Evidence based science (I can’t believe I just wrote that!)
2. Impartiality in the science: equality of access to publication, to funding
3. A dogged determination to root out bigotry of opposing views and a ruthless push to (improve then) maintain standards.
4. Scientifically based methods in forecasting and predictions of effects of those forecasts.

On that basis I might suggest something like the “Scottish Association for Scientific Climate predictions”.

Scope

What is the scope?

1. Geography: Scotland.
2. Area of interest: Climate, climate science, climate predictions and economic and social predictions based on climate predictions.

Method of operation/ practical aims

1. To create a website repository of reliable information.
2. To disseminate that information to others
3. To encourage and support its members in the dissemination of that information throughout Scottish Society by way of internet forums, meetings.
4. Direct action: storms of sceptics will attack the parliament projecting semi compacted crystals of de-energised dihydrogen monoxide.

It’s a start … Comments Welcome!

Addendum – Why?

The following from the Scottish Parliament’s MSP’s code of conduct should explain:

5.1.5 In addition, members should:
• consider whether a meeting with one group which is making representations on an issue should be balanced by offering another group with different views an opportunity to make representations;

Note it does not say: “individuals” but says “groups”. In order to push the button given to us under that section, we need some form of group. This is not only for our benefit, it is also for theirs: as a properly organised group will present the information they need in a considered and easily digested manner and e.g. make it easier to follow up if there are further questions. It also allows them to know the “consensus” of that group without themselves having to meet with all the individuals of that persuasion to find what (if anything) they have in common in their views.