From: The best one on
Translation: Richard Sumner (UK)
February 13, 2010

Sacked KNMI Director wiped the floor with the climate know-it–alls as
early as the 1990’s

Gagged! Thrown out on the street! In the nineties, Henk Tennekes was
made to clear his desk and resign as Director of the KNMI (Dutch
Meteorological Institute). His sin? In a newspaper column the world-
renowned meteorologist had disproved all the bold claims about climate
change. Swearing in high places! And in the meantime, “hard proof” for
the greenhouse effect evaporated. After all the scandal surrounding
the UN IPCC panel, the sceptics voice can finally be heard. Time for
the rehabilitation of Holland’s first climate exile?

Rehabilitation of the country’s first CO2-exile

By Edwin Timmer

ARNHEM - “I worry a lot these days. I worry about the arrogance of
scientists who blithely claim that they are here to solve the climate
problem, as long as they receive massive increases in funding. I worry
about the way they covet new supercomputers. Others talk about
”stabilizing the climate“. I’m terrified of the arrogance, vanity and
recklessness of those words. Why is it so difficult to demonstrate a
little humility?“ Is this a response to recent climate scandals? Sober
criticism of the failed IPCC UN climate panel that exaggerated the
melting of the glaciers? No, these are extracts from a column which
appeared exactly twenty(!) years ago in a British scientific journal.
When the then Director of Policy Development at the KNMI (Holland’s
Met Office,) Henk Tennekes put the cat among the pigeons. Watch out
for all the unsubstantiated claims about climate! “My role as research
director was regarded by the people around me as primarily that of
provider of the next even bigger computer. But I wanted to get to the
heart of the problem. Are these forecast models reliable? Not funny,
everyone thought. Looking for the truth? You must be mad! That means
you have to accept the fallibility of these models. That’s much too
dangerous. Most of the KNMI researchers were happy if they could just
sit in the cafetaria with their like-minded colleagues.”

Greenhouse Theory


The now 73-year-old scientist still persists in his fundamental
criticism of climate modelling, for instance the often-heard argument
that ‘95 percent of the greenhouse theory remains valid’. Tennekes:
“Why does the IPCC ignore the oceans? The top 2½ meters of all sea-
water contain as much heat as the total amount of heat in the
atmosphere. Why has the topmost kilometre of the oceans turned colder
during the last five years? We don’t know. Until we understand what is
happening with the heat in the oceans, the models which aim to predict
the climate are totally useless.

Tennekes himself acknowledges that he has never been the easiest
person to deal with. “I was a troublemaker, and have a horrible
temper,” he says whilst gazing out over the snow from his home in the
Molenbeke district of Arnhem. “I lose my temper and get angry easily.
When that column was published, my associates complained behind my
back to the big boss, Harry Fijnaut.” Henk, within two years you’ll be
out on the street“ said Harry. In fact, it took him three years
because he first had to invent a reorganization which would make my
position superfluous. That’s how those toplevel bureaucrats arrange
things. He wouldn’t even allow me a dismissal on grounds of
’incompatibility of characters.’

Climate Outcast

And so Tennekes became the first climate exile in the Netherlands. In
retrospect the incident is illustrative of how during the past twenty
years climate research - and accompanying alarming statements „appears
to have fallen into the hands of a small clique that tolerates no
contradiction, and equates dissenters to Holocaust deniers. Tennekes:
“KNMI’ers still avoid me like the plague, because I say something
different from the group dogma. First you must believe in something,
only then you are allowed to participate in their discussions” In
1986, Tennekes unleashed a revolution in weather forecasting in a
speech to the Royal Meteorological Society. That speech made him world-
famous among his peers. The slogan he launched in that speech was: “No
forecast is complete without a forecast of forecast skill. His eyes
twinkle when he recalls that event.
For the IPCC this was a warning of biblical proportions.

Once Tennekes was out on thestreet, he was floored, a psychological
wreck. Moreover, there were problems with his pension. “There are few
professors who earn as little as me.” Teaching college-level courses
for retired people (in the UK these are called U3A, University for the
3rd Age) and his passion for flying and birds helped him get through
it. Not only did Tennekes write the first book ever about turbulence
in the ’70’s, he recently rewrote his book ’The Simple Science of
Flight’, used by high school seniors and college students the world
over. The bartailed godwit flies non-stop over the Pacific Ocean in a
week. Eleven thousand kilometers from Alaska to New Zealand! How is it
possible? How can it feed itself? Other species of wading birds manage
only 5,000 kilometers! What is at hand here? The bar-tailed godwit has
much better aerodynamics than we thought. Enormously efficient flying
muscles. And it undergoes crazy physiological changes during the
flight. All of its fat and half of its flight muscles are burned up by
the time it reaches its destination. Even its heart has shrunk. People
have no idea of the flexibility of living things!"

His enthusiasm falters when he thinks of the World Wildlife Fund or
the Society for the Protection of Birds, which see climate change as a
major threat to animals. Tennekes buries his head in his hands and
moans: “That’s not science, that’s advocacy. Environmental Clubs are
based on the idea that each bird and each territory must remain the
same forever. But nature is not static! Put a bird on an island and
within one hundred years you have a new species. I get really annoyed
by the idea that we’re here to save nature. That’s a terrible
overstatement of our abilities”. “The notion that the climate is the
biggest catastrophe of our time, is pure grandstanding. Who’s taken in
by all this climate talk? Moreover, the general public is
systematically exposed to nightmare scenarios. I find that scandalous.
Yes, as far as the climate debate goes, I’m becoming blunter every
day. When IPCC says that sea level will rise fifty centimeters in a
hundred years, it’s an exaggeration, but I’ll let them get away with
it. If Al Gore makes six meters of it, then I’ll swear loudly. If Rob
van Dorland of KNMI then smirks and says that Gore was perhaps
”exaggerating a little“, then I’ll swear even more loudly. You’re
fooling us!”

New Ice Age

“I am much more anxious about the cooling of the earth. The ultimate
fate of this planet is a new ice age. If the main wheat belts of the
Northern hemisphere fail to produce their much needed harvest, heaven
knows how we will feed ourselves. Well, it could be that warming will
lead to a disaster. I still want to accept that. But you must weigh
this unknown risk against other problems. Why should we spend insane
amounts to prevent CO2 emissions, while the risk is uncertain and any
potential benefits of the solution unsure? With much less money we
could eradicate malaria from this planet. Or fight HIV, before the
entire African population decimates itself“.

Intimate clique

“No, I’m not surprised about the fuss surrounding current climate
research. This storm has been brewing for years. The contributions of
climate sceptics disappear unnoticed in the rubbishbin. IPCC is run by
an intimate clique of only a few dozen people. I believe that Minister
Cramer (Environment) is a victim of the spin-doctors who surround her,
people who believe ’good causes’ are served best by evil means. But
these green bureaucrats do not understand the meaning of the proverb.
It is the road to HELL that is paved with good intentions, not the
road to HEAVEN. You can print that.“

Translation: Richard Sumner (UK)
February 13,