David Bellamy Gets It Completely Wrong on Climate Change Science

Mon, 2009-03-30 15:37Mitchell Anderson
Mitchell Anderson's picture

David Bellamy Gets It Completely Wrong on Climate Change Science


























So much for the robust case against climate science.





It's hard to be generous to Bellamy when one considers that he used to be on the other side of the divide between science and the denialists. As I remember it, Bellamy used to be persuaded by the science that climate change was already happening and was the result of human activity.

Wikipedia agrees.

"The profligate demands of humankind are causing far reaching changes to the atmosphere of planet Earth, of this there is no doubt. Earth's temperature is showing an upward swing, the so-called greenhouse effect, now a subject of international concern. The greenhouse effect may melt the glaciers and ice caps of the world causing the sea to rise and flood many of our great cities and much of our best farmland." - David Bellamy in 1989

But despite climate science becoming far more extensive in breadth and depth, Bellamy has completely changed his mind. This really beggars belief.

Let's remember that Bellamy is a scientist - he's a Botanist with a PhD and he became a Professor. So presumably he has had a love of searching for the truth. But what happened?

Since he has clearly not been persuaded by the science. It's hard to conclude that he has either

a) gone mad,


b) has sold his soul to the fossil-fuel devil(s).

Since he hangs around with other deniers - apparently he went to the 2009 Heartland Conference, it looks like the answer is b)!


Anyone who hangs around with this pack of denialists

(partial list: Lord Bunkum of Bonkers; Willie Soon [OISM Garbage]; David Legates; Arthur Robinson [OISM Garbage]; Fred Singer; Lawrence Solomon; Ross McKitrick; Patrick Michaels; Bob Carter; the Idsos [Craig; Sherwood]; Myron Ebell; Antony Watts; Marc Morano; Zbigniew Jaworowski; Roy Spencer; Dennis T. Avery; Tim Ball.) 

And who spreads their lies, needs to be treated with a combination of ridicule and contempt:



I just dont understand the whole climate change denial movement. What do these people possibly have to gain with these claims? If they are right, well nothing changes at all, and no one will really care, and if they are wrong then the world and our existance on it is sevearly threatened, and millions if not billions of lives are at risk.

I suspect that what is troubling the deniers deep down is that in science in order for your results to be truly valid you need to remove as many of the other variables as possible. Otherwise it could be that one of those other variables is in fact causing what you are seeing rather than the hypothesis you are testing.

I've posted a bit more on this topic here:


Because it is a principal of scientific thinking to question: is something scientific or not.
Climate has always been changing and the definition of climate includes 30 years average changes.
Climate change movement is political, it is all about change to sustainable industries, which itself, is positive.
On the other hand, let us not forget CARBON DIOXIDE IS GOOD FOR THE PLANTS, forests biodiversity, agriculture....

David Bellamy was raising the Public's awareness of environmental issues long before it became "mainstream". He was and still is a true Environmentalist and Scientist. The fact he happens to disagree with the prevailing orthodoxy, as he did in the past, should be a cause for celebration, rather than criticism. 


You obviously weren't paying attention.

Yes: 'David Bellamy was raising the Public's awareness of environmental issues long before it became "mainstream". He was and still is a true Environmentalist and [while he may technically may still be a] Scientist.'

He's either lost the plot or moved over to the DARK SIDE.

What he currently says, is NOT supported by the science.

Could you please explain [in terms of science] his bloopers about glaciers, peer-review and carbon dioxide?