Dennis Jensen spoke out about the hype around global-warming as long ago as 2004, when there were almost no politicians (or anyone for that matter) daring to publicly mention any skeptical thoughts. It was so risky. What he said then is still largely true.
Jensen obviously knows what science is, can see through the sacred cows, and has the background to foster and filter good science from bad. Science is much more than “climate”, and vested interests pull at it from all directions. We need a science minister who won’t be fooled by slick press releases or activists wearing lab-coats.
Science is broken, web sites are funded to smear senior scientists, namecalling is rife to the highest levels. Government funded work no longer belongs to the public — instead so-called scientists and their universities fight legal battles to hide it from critics, while they run away from public debate. Science has been misused, exploited and corrupted, to justify sweeping changes to the economy, our laws, potentially our way of life. The ARC has lost its way, funding political research disguised as “psychology” that is transparently designed to denigrate voters who disagree with the government. These millions could have gone to medical research instead.
No matter what Jensen says, he will be attacked by the religious acolytes of climate change (see Graham Readfearn) for the most ridiculous of things (like things that he has never said). The country needs to rise above the frivolous and naked attempts to control policies by childish verbal intimidation.
Dennis Jensen has a PhD in Materials Science and Physics, experience at CSIRO and in Defense Science and Technology Organisation. He’s the most highly qualified member of Parliament in any area of science.
He foresaw in 2004 that the theory of man-made global warming was “suspect” and would probably come unstuck — the models were failing, some of the data was being hidden from view, and other data was questionable. This was not a full time research project, nor his specialty, and he held no full time position requiring him to investigate man-made global warming, and yet almost all of what he said then stands the test of time and all the newer results since then has borne out his judgment.
Dr Jensen’s Maiden Speech- Nov 2004
Governor General’s Speech: Address-in-Reply – House of Representatives
“… Being an analytical person, I tend to take a dim view of sacred cows that are not backed up by verifiable facts. One example of these sacred cows having wide currency is the issue of global warming.
This issue has been taken up by parts of the community with almost religious fervour; however, the problem is that the science backing the claims is suspect. The warming trend that has been covered repeatedly in the media has been generated from ground based measuring stations. Problematically, these stations are affected by urban heat islands. Of course, this is not mentioned by the proponents of global-warming theories. There are far more reliable ways to measure global temperatures, such as through the use of Aerosonde balloons and satellites, which are unaffected by urban heat islands. Unfortunately for the global warmers, the data from these sources do not show the warming trend, so, disingenuously, only the ground based readings are used.
There is another piece of evidence that runs counter to the global warmers’ view. The major scare issue with global warming is that of melting polar caps, particularly the Antarctic ice cap. All models for global warming have the maximum increase in temperature occurring at the poles, for good reason: the absorption of heat by greenhouse gases occurs predominantly at temperatures that are common at the polar regions. So, given this, maximum heating should be observed at the polar regions. The problem for the global warmers is that this is not happening. Of more than 10 measurement stations in Antarctica, only one, on the Ross Ice Shelf, shows the warming trend. The rest exhibit no such heating. There is much other data pointing to the fallacy of the global warming scare campaign. Despite this, the global warmers want us to not only bet our economy but, more likely, significantly damage our economy on a theory that will probably go the way of the flat earth theory: restricted to a few adherents who have become totally divorced from reality.
Do not for a moment think that this makes me an antienvironmentalist. I believe that there are significant benefits to be had by controlling harmful emissions. In fact, in many cases a reduction in emissions can result in economic benefits as a result of converting some of the pollutants collected into useful products. This leads me to conclude that during this term of the Howard government we should be focusing on positive solutions to the many challenges which we face.”
He visited Afghanistan as Deputy Chair of the Joint Standing Committee: Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade (more photos here).
About Dennis Jensen
Dr Dennis Jensen is the Liberal federal member for Tangney in Western Australia. A former air traffic controller, CSIRO and later Defence research scientist, and defence analyst. He’s played an important part in Australia’s air capability debate. [From Online Opinion]
His website: Dennis Jensen’s home page