Quote

How is it that, in the face of overwhelming scientific evidence, there are still some who would deny the dangers of climate change? Not surprisingly, the loudest voices are not scientific, and it is remarkable how many economists, lawyers, journalists and politicians set themselves up as experts on the science.

I'm a politician. I'm not going to get into a whole range of scientific argument with scientists.

Many of the alarmists on global warming, they've got a problem because the science doesn't back them up.

I don't know how you overcome the dearth of scientists in the government positions.

Much of the debate over global warming is predicated on fear, rather than science.

Unfortunately the global warming hysteria, as I see it, is driven by politics more than by science.

Politicians or pundits can distort or cherry-pick climate science any way they want to try and gain temporary influence with the public. But any serious industrialist who's facing 'climate exposure' - as it's now called by money managers - cannot afford to engage in that sort of self-delusion.

A lot of my role is advocacy, and as a scientist, you're an advocate, too, because you are coming up with a theory and having to convince your fellow scientists that you're right.

There's a danger of some of the best people saying, 'I don't want a career in science.'

As this body of knowledge has evolved, a much more critical job for researchers and scientists has evolved into explaining and educating policy makers and the public to the risks of global warming and the possible consequences of action or of no action.