Royal Society on Research Councils’ cuts

March 28, 2007 at 12:02 pm | Posted in Budget cuts, Climate change, Climate science, Royal Society, Science research | 1 Comment

Royal Society letter to Secretary of State for Trade and Industry on Research Councils’ budget cuts dated 26 February 2007 (PDF)

BBC NEWS Science/Nature article on (Rover) ‘Car company collapse hits science’ dated 22 February 2007 (PDF)

“UK science has become an unexpected victim of the Rover collapse as funds used to soften the impact of the failure were clawed back from research.”

Hello parliamentofideas! Those two PDFs (above) popped immediately to mind when I read your question:

The Royal Society now refuses grant funding to critics of anthroprogenic global warming?

We cannot believe this – tell us it isn’t true, please.

A failed British car company and a failing British energy company needed bale out funds. The UK Government obliged by shifting money that had been allocated to scientific research. Climate research is affected. Ironic, to put it mildly.

According to BBC NEWS in that article:

The Department for Trade and Industry said it faced financial pressures that required it to re-balance its spending.

Ongoing costs related to the loss of the Rover car company and the rescue package put together for British Energy were cited as causes for the shortfall.

It means £68m given to the UK Research Councils by the DTI will be taken back.

I do not even know if I am correct in my surmising. If you can provide more details, I shall gladly investigate when I have time.


Bottom line:


Climate research of all kinds has been affected by the UK Government’s decision

to reduce UK science funding

in order to rescue a failed car company and failing energy company.

I wonder whether this is a foreshadowing of what will happen in America. Automakers are hard-pressed in the U.S. and energy companies have been the fiercest of opponents to climate change action.

Do you know someone who has applied specifically to criticise AGW? Here’s a relevant quote from the most recent Royal Society statement on that topic, with my emphasis:

“Scientists will continue to monitor the global climate and the factors which influence it. It is important that all legitimate potential scientific explanations continue to be considered and investigated. Debate will continue, …”








1 Comment »

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

  1. Now I see where you are coming from, John. Here’s my response:

    I support the Royal Society in its letter to ExxonMobil telling the company to stop funding climate change denial.

    The spiked-online article you linked to deliberately misrepresents the Royal Society’s position by quoting an open letter to the Royal Society thus:

    An open letter to the Society – signed by Tim Ball, a professor of climatology at the University of Winnipeg, and others – argues that ‘scientific inquiry is unique because it requires falsifiability’: ‘The beauty of science is that no issue is ever “settled”, that no question is beyond being more fully understood, that no conclusion is immune to further experimentation. And yet for the first time in history, the Royal Society is shamelessly using the media to say emphatically: “case closed” on all issues related to climate change.’

    It does not say:

    The Royal Society now refuses grant funding to critics of anthroprogenic global warming

    I agree we need more human compassion, and we have the technical capabilities to solve many problems now.

    We in America lack one thing: political will.

    Please help.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at
Entries and comments feeds.

%d bloggers like this: