By Sir Mortimer Long-Bore, Ph.D., FRS

Distinguished Professor of Science,

Chairman of the Department of Theoretical Modelling

Director of the Institute of Advanced Analysis

Stonetablet College, Topp University

Royal National Academy of Scientific Societies


As a man of science, who is often described as one of the world’s leading experts on matters scientific, I am frequently prevailed upon to offer assessments of new books. In the case of this particular book, the request came from the authors, who specifically asked for a denunciation. In their letter they indicate a desire to “get it over with” and to have it done by the very highest authority. I am happy to oblige.

Science proceeds by the careful accumulation of authoritative expert wisdom, as recorded in the leading peer-reviewed journals, such as those of which my closest associates and I serve as editors. We are vigilant against allowing hard, established facts to be subject to frivolous question. The long history of science has taught us the paramount importance of preserving intellectual freedom. I speak of the freedom to accept and profess the truth, and the freedom to refuse to question that which is established on the word of the highest scientific authority. Readers of this book will learn none of these things. I denounce it utterly.

I had initially supposed this to be a book of independent thinking and skeptical attitude. My fears were well-founded. The authors recklessly question the widely-accepted doctrines of global warming and the conclusions of the very eminent International Expert Panel on Climate Change [sic]. This is deeply disturbing to me. We cannot allow people to undermine the consensus position on global warming, after all the effort that went into imposing it.

The greenhouse effect is lifting the global temperature to dangerous levels. This is proven by elementary Newtonian physics as used in our most advanced computer climate models. The global temperature is warmer today than ever before in the planet’s history; modern computerized climate models can predict future warming with impressive numerical precision; the greenhouse “fingerprint” has been positively identified in global temperature data. We have complete certainty that our future is imperiled. We observe that sea levels are rising, storms are increasingly violent, droughts and floods ravage the land, animals are dying, and the Arctic ice cap is gone, I am told. One reels at the horror of it all.

The authors are wrong to question any of this. Morally wrong. Nor are the authors even qualified to make commentary on this sublime topic. One is an applied mathematician who apparently works on topics in radiation and fluid dynamics. The other is an economist who studies environmental policy. What claim has either to expertise on global warming or climate change? For tutelage on issues of such importance I counsel reliance on the authority of qualified experts. You may find, as I did, the book An Inconvenient Truth to be greatly informative in this respect.

In contrast, the book you are viewing is subversive climate literature. Do not read it. I have not read it, and you should not either; indeed, I threw my copy on the fire. I only regret that burning the book was my only remedy. In a better age I would have burned the authors with it.




Copyright © 2007 by Christopher Essex and Ross McKitrick