Anthropogenic climate change is a political issue not a scientific one. Not all scientist believe climate change is a threat to mankind but their voices are supressed for political reasons. David Milliband when questioned about his understanding of the science admitted he didn't even have a GCSE in any scientific subject! Political or what?

Ron Scaife, Welwyn, Herts

Well said; while this trend is not good for politics (and definitely not good for the millions in the developed world who will be trapped in long-term poverty if the IPCC's prescriptions are followed), it is not good for science either. Science moves forward by questioning and dissent. The more it comes to depend on government funding as a reward for upholding accepted dogmas, the less able it will be to uncover the truth and continue to improve living standards.

Dr. Stephen Morris, Shrewsbury, UK

Great article, nice to see there are others as worried by the slavish devotion to 'science' we have in our society. In my opinion, it is a bizarre backwards step - rather than embracing the rational, skeptical nature of science we have instead chosen to blindly accept the lofty pronouncements of its practitioners, rather like tribes following shaman. I saw a great comment on these boards a while back that sums it all up nicely:

"At our present level of ignorance, we believe that the earth circles the sun"

Richard, Oxford,

Mick

You have completely missed the point. Whilst it is easy to make policy on uninformed opinion and ignorance, this is not a particularly good way of making decisions.

You seem to believe some global conspiracy of scientists is "telling politicians what to do". The reality is that the way society acts affects our environment and our health, to a greater or lesser degree. A detailed understanding of these consequences is the result of scientific investigation of causes and effects, which enables predictions to be made. The science behind climate change, which you seem to disapprove of so much, merely predicts consequences of various actions society might take. Unfortunately, the best prediction of the consequences of inaction are severe.

Is it that you really don't like to hear things that you find uncomforatable? Surely you would agree that politicians should base decisions on a sound knowledge of the consequences of their actions, rather than uninformed opinion.

Peter, London,

Well said Mick Hume. Was it not the great Nobel Laureate Richard Feynman who said that `science is what we don`t know`!

Dave, Cardiff,

I certainly agree that while science can show us that there are issues to be dealt with, the action to be taken must be decided by political means. To take the example of global warming, the best scientific knowledge we available now clear indicates that this is a serious and potentially disastrous issue on which we should act as soon as possible to avert the worst outcome - maybe "The Science" will change on this as we learn more, but it is foolish to ignore the best available information, particularly on the grounds that we dislike the implications. However, it does not follow that scientists are the best people to choose the best remedial action from the suggestions they may offer.

Perhaps policy makers could learn something from the process of science. If every policy were considered an experiment, with a predicted testable outcome, we might be better able to judge its value and choose to abort those that are clearly unsuccessful at an early stage.

Paul Schleifer, Chiswick,

I think it ironic that when today everything in life from cell phones to our very houses and everything between is the product of the hard work of scientists, and everyone is thrilled to bits with all that However when science comes out with some inconvenient facts that will mean we have to make some changes to our greedy, wasteful and unsustainable lifestyles, the scientists are suddenly the bad guys.
Throw out everything which has a connection to science and you are back living in a mud hut.
I would like to draw a small picture for the mentally challenged
You are on a mountain road in your lovely new car when the brakes fail. You know you cannot make it around the next bend and will fall 200 ft.
If you drive into the cliff face you will cause very expensive repairs to the car but you will most likely live to drive another day
Thats what fixing global warming is, a sensible choice

leonidas, york, uk

Science certainly does not equal truth! It is a noble endeavor to understand a mysterious universe, but conducted by flawed, imperfect beings called scientists. These worthies try to build increasingly sophisticated models of reality using theory, experiment and observation but are handicapped by the fact that they are humans with the full array of human shortcomings and failings.

From this perspective, it is easy to see that the "latest" research is also typically the most uncertain (since it has yet to be confirmed) and that so-called "consensus" is often based as much on sociology and politics as on sound theory and data.

To give unquestioning credance to the scientific front-line is either naive or self-serving and there are far too many people guilty of both these crimes in public life. This is an excellent article. We must moderate those who are bringing the name of science into disrepute for their own base political ends

WS, Edinburgh, UK

De-politicise science! Excellent notion. Climate Change is an excellent example of politicised science, debased to serve a grand narrative of marxian, post-modern anti-democracy.
Science is in danger of stepping into the cultural space of theology. That would be dire news indeed, since the Greens already seek to close debate down within science.

Richard, Norwich,

What a ludicrous proposition! This is like complaining that we are basing 'every policy and initiative, from climate change to child obesity' on the truth. This sounds like a refreshing change for the better to me. Power to the white coats.

Alan Benn, Bath, UK

It might help if we had a proper opposition which opposes government nonsense on "climate change" (is there anything more risible than the phrase "stopping climate change"?).
Instead we have Ainsworth of the Tories attacking Brown for not going far enough.
God save us from the political class.

Jim Carr, Bospham, UK

As you say, politicians now hide behind science as a way to justify their own prejudices. But as any good scientist knows, science is not simply a perfect body of knowledge on which to base arguments, but a process towards elucidating the truth. Something certain politicians might do well to remember.

Dr Kevin Law, Dundee, UK

Quite right. As Bjorn Lomberg has pointed out, all the money needed to be spent on fixing global warming could provide clean drinking water for everyone on the planet. Science can only delineate problems. It cannot dictate the focus of our effort.

James , Canberra, Australia.