WUWT makes a difference – London Science Museum changes their climate change exhibit

Remember this post before the heady days of Climategate?

And then what happens? Another online poll that might go horribly wrong

Click for larger image

And this one?

Data adjustments in the UK Science Museum “Prove It!” poll on climate

graphThe raw data is available graphically, thank you David, at http://proveit.isgreat.org/

It appears that the London Science Museum got the message loud and clear, today we have this piece in the Times Online:

Public scepticism prompts Science Museum to rename climate exhibition

Ben Webster, Environment Editor

The Science Museum is revising the contents of its new climate science gallery to reflect the wave of scepticism that has engulfed the issue in recent months.

The decision by the 100-year-old London museum reveals how deeply scientific institutions have been shaken by the public’s reaction to revelations of malpractice by climate scientists.

The museum is abandoning its previous practice of trying to persuade visitors of the dangers of global warming. It is instead adopting a neutral position, acknowledging that there are legitimate doubts about the impact of man-made emissions on the climate.

Even the title of the £4 million gallery has been changed to reflect the museum’s more circumspect approach. The museum had intended to call it the Climate Change Gallery, but has decided to change this to Climate Science Gallery to avoid being accused of presuming that emissions would change the temperature.

Last October the museum launched a temporary exhibition called “Prove It! All the evidence you need to believe in climate change”. The museum said at the time that the exhibition had been designed to demonstrate “through scientific evidence that climate change is real and requires an urgent solution”.

Chris Rapley, the museum’s director, told The Times that it was taking a different approach after observing how the climate debate had been affected by leaked e-mails and overstatements of the dangers of global warming. He said: “We have come to realise, given the way this subject has become so polarised over the past three to four months, that we need to be respectful and welcoming of all views on it.”

Professor Rapley, a climate scientist and former director of the British Antarctic Survey research centre, said that the museum needed to remain neutral in order to be trusted: “The Science Museum will not state a position on whether or not climate change is real, driven by humans or threatening.”

Professor Rapley declined to give his own views on climate change, saying that they were not relevant. However, in 2007 he said: “The more greenhouse gases we add, the warmer we’ll be. It’s not rocket science.”

======================

Oh but it is. Note the continued existence of NASA GISS, which would be but a footnote if they didn’t apply “rocket science” and some stagecraft to it back in 1988.

And it is a big abut face compared to when we last heard from Professor Rapley via this WUWT post:

Science Museum Prove It! poll now closed – surprising results

Today (1 December 2009) Professor Chris Rapley CBE, Director of the Science Museum and Professor of Climate Science at UCL said:

“More work needs to be done to convince people of the reality of human-induced climate change and of the urgency with which we must agree an international solution. Public organisations, like the Science Museum, have a responsibility to lay out the evidence and open up public discussion.”

======================

Read the complete story here at the Times:  Public scepticism prompts Science Museum to rename climate exhibition

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

74 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
March 24, 2010 7:36 pm

“The museum is abandoning its previous practice of trying to persuade visitors of the dangers of global warming. It is instead adopting a neutral position, acknowledging that there are legitimate doubts about the impact of man-made emissions on the climate.”
“legitimate doubts”
I’m thinking being a “legitimate doubter” is much better than “denier” or even “skeptic”.

March 24, 2010 7:37 pm

Thank you, Anthony! All I can say is “WOW!”
I think the past season’s snow, from Scotland to Devon, had a lot to do with the recent skepticism of the Brits…This picture still blows me away:
http://www.strudel.org.uk/blog/astro/000927.shtml

Steve Goddard
March 24, 2010 7:37 pm

Museum visits to the global warming exhibit were down this winter because of all the cold and snow.

Steve in SC
March 24, 2010 7:38 pm

They must have been absolutely overwhelmed with negative responses.
It is so un AGW of them to change the company line even a little bit.
Still their exhibit probably belongs with the alchemists for all its credibility.

Jeef
March 24, 2010 7:41 pm

I missed the original data adjustment post, but wow!
Good to see a leading institution at least paying lip service to all views rather than peddling the MSM one.

NickB.
March 24, 2010 7:43 pm

Score one for reason and common sense! A Science Museun, or a school for that matter, should be a place for education – not a place for terrorizing children with overstated politically motivated pseudoscience. Let the grown-ups debate that stuff, leave the kids alone!

Bernie
March 24, 2010 7:45 pm

Are these the final numbers for the ProveIt survey? The numbers alone must have given any non-fanatic pause for thought.

John in NZ
March 24, 2010 7:45 pm

I sent the Science Museum my two cents worth some months ago. I am pleased they listened.

Jeef
March 24, 2010 7:47 pm
March 24, 2010 7:53 pm

Congratulations and heartfelt thank yous to Mr. Watts, Mr. McIntyre, and the other auditors for all your years of effort, and to all the others who write and question with open, inquisitive minds!
Hopefully instead of directing monies toward the senseless purchasing of carbon credits that will only enrich those who have established the carbon exchanges, we will direct our efforts toward what is worthwhile and achievable: cleansing the waterways, especially the oceans of plastic and the rivers of Asia of toxins; preserving biodiversity to ensure scientists have the opportunity to study the genes Nature has been assembling for billions of years; and to preserving habitat so future generations can marvel at the greatness of planet Earth.
Time to move beyond a concern for carbon dioxide and time to establish an eco-sensible approach to environmental husbandry.
Three cheers, “Huzzah!” The myth is fading and will soon be nothing more than a nearly forgotten frightful fairy tale.
I’m all for The Lorax, I understand acid rain and the ozone hole, no-one is for another Love Canal, and I also understand that carbon dioxide poses no threat; the issues are separate and the greenies should stop packaging them together.
Huzzah!

Elizabeth (Canada)
March 24, 2010 7:57 pm

“…we need to be respectful and welcoming of all views on [global warming].”
No kidding.
And here I am, still worrying about being forced to take psychotropic medication to treat my climate denial disorder. (See: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/03/23/brains-brains/

Patrick Davis
March 24, 2010 7:58 pm

“Chris Rapley, the museum’s director, told The Times that it was taking a different approach after observing how the climate debate had been affected by leaked e-mails and overstatements of the dangers of global warming. He said: “We have come to realise, given the way this subject has become so polarised over the past three to four months, that we need to be respectful and welcoming of all views on it.”
Leaked e-mails, not hacked, released or stolen? Interesting change in attitude there.
“Professor Rapley declined to give his own views on climate change, saying that they were not relevant. However, in 2007 he said: “The more greenhouse gases we add, the warmer we’ll be. It’s not rocket science.”
Then why do we need to pay rocket scientist money to these “climatologists”? I want my taxes back if it’s that simple.

papertiger
March 24, 2010 8:12 pm

That’s a good thing you did for the UK, Anthony.
But there’s another poll – a more important one – one that counts – that is underway here, closer to home.
We can put California to a straight up or down vote on AB 32 if the suspend AB 32 ballot initiative gets 400K registered voter signatures in the next two weeks.
How about helping your neighbors out a little, buddy?

rb Wright
March 24, 2010 8:25 pm

Hopefully this change will trigger reviews of other climate exhibits in public facilities. The Scripps Institute of Oceanography’s “Feeling the Heat” exhibit, at the Birch Aquarium in La Jolla, California, has a major posting near the entrance which states:
“EVIDENCE IS EVERYWHERE: The most visible impact of global warming is the world’s ice. Most of the world’s ancient glaciers are swiftly shrinking and may be gone within decades. Arctic ice is declining at a rapid pace. At the other end of the globe, ancient ice sheets on the Antarctic peninsula are disintegrating. While these changes have serious local consequences, they will be felt globally too.”

Steve Goddard
March 24, 2010 8:28 pm

If anyone has any spare global warming, please send it Colorado.

March 24, 2010 8:29 pm

”””’ Anthony: First line in your post, you said, ‘Remember this post before the heady days of Climategate?’ ”””””
Anthony,
Actually, I do remember those heady days before Climategate. Hopeful is the spirit I remember.
I still remain hopeful.
And Anthony, I sincerely, hope that you remain hopeful too.
Best wishes.
John

pat
March 24, 2010 8:35 pm

climategate is hotting up, and there’s a desperation by the CO2 Bubble crowd, so let’s spread info far and wide ASAP:
someone posted this on a previous thread:
Aloha Analytics: Details of Climate Bill in U.S. Senate Trickle Out
Sen. Lieberman explained…the first draft of the planned bill, to be written during Congress’s two-week recess that begins on March 29. Sen. Kerry reinforced the group’s accelerated timetable, saying, “we have some really key meetings in the next few days . . . we have a lot of work to do in the next 48 hours.”…
http://alohaanalytics.blogspot.com/2010/03/details-of-climate-bill-trickle-out.html
24 March: WSJ: Europe’s Cap-and-Trade Lesson
Market-based environmentalism, or a boondoggle?
Having at last fixed America’s health-care system once and for all—or maybe not—Congressional Democrats are promising to apply themselves to the task of imposing legislative curbs on carbon. So it’s a good time to see how a prototype cap-and-trade scheme, the European Union’s Emission Trading System, is faring. So far, not so good…
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704896104575139673240771564.html?mod=WSJ_latestheadlines

Richard Sharpe
March 24, 2010 8:39 pm

papertiger (20:12:25) said:

That’s a good thing you did for the UK, Anthony.
But there’s another poll – a more important one – one that counts – that is underway here, closer to home.
We can put California to a straight up or down vote on AB 32 if the suspend AB 32 ballot initiative gets 400K registered voter signatures in the next two weeks: http://www.kfiam640.com/pages/jk2010.html
How about helping your neighbors out a little, buddy?

Sigh, I am not a citizen, and thus not a registered voter, so I can’t sign. Still, I know people who will likely sign.

johnnythelowery
March 24, 2010 8:43 pm

Some one has to be commissioned by WUWT with a wad of donated carbon credits at .10p a ton, 3x send-a-mate-a-pint tokens, and 2x get-out-of-jail cards, to hot foot it down there…..and report, w/photos, what exactly is the carnival grade candy-flossed dross they are trying to sell to the poor innocents and (mostly) the kids. Any takers………

johnnythelowery
March 24, 2010 8:43 pm

Funds could be raised by doing a Nashville style 24hr ‘share-a-thong!’

johnnythelowery
March 24, 2010 8:44 pm

Patchy Morals could be our first customer

johnnythelowery
March 24, 2010 8:48 pm

We are about to be snowed under when the whitehouse gets it’s rear end in gear to deal with ‘the climate’. Even the crew at WUWT won’t be able to shovel fast enough from all the BS. 2010 is going to the battle of the planet

R. Craigen
March 24, 2010 8:52 pm

Good except for one thing: the name change!
I rather liked “Prove It!” — I thought it was quite apt, and reflected my sentiments about the subject quite well. It would have condensed well the thoughts of the majority side in their ill-conceived poll.
“Climate Science Gallery” is so ho-hum. Right, let’s all go and spend the afternoon learning about convective heat transfer and cloud cover. Remember kids: high cloud, low albedo, low cloud high IR absorption. Yay! If they must go there, how about “ClimateGate Gallery”. I’d love to see that on display, with regular updates on bad science and bad behavior from around the world. They want provocative? There’s provocative, and relevant! Science education in action!

Editor
March 24, 2010 9:08 pm

Ric Werme deserves a lot of credit for his monitoring of this poll. Credit also goes to a Lurker/hacker calling himself “Lihard” who was the first to hack the poll to show its absurdity. After giving the rest of us the opportunity to beat up on him and declare our moral superiority, he “repented” and made a parallel monitor to Ric’s. The poll was hacked two or three times afterwards and “revised” by the museum twice. It was a farce, even by on-line standards, but the skeptics “won”.
Expect the Empire to strike back.
[REPLY – With all due respect, hacking the poll was a terrible thing, regardless of whether it was to “demonstrate absurdity”. It made us look bad, plain and simple. And winning means nothing unless it’s played straight. Nothing! Victories built on cheating are built on sand. As the hockey team is learning — the hard way. ~ Evan]

D. King
March 24, 2010 9:11 pm

Maybe the EPA can learn something from this.
“They also revealed discussion about NASA’s data being less reliable than — and indeed reliant upon — the non-existent Climategate temperature history from Britain’s Climate Research Unit (CRU).”
http://tinyurl.com/ycf7fjm

1 2 3