Bryden Allen's Website

A Letter to the New Scientist

On 16 of March 2013 the following article appeared in the New Scientist:




Because the diagram gave a very false impression of current temperatures, I wrote the following letter:


The Editor, New Scientist
          I have written a substantial book on stopping Climate Change (attached). So I know this subject reasonably well.
            I was delighted last week when I saw you had an article on Climate Change with a graph of the temperature evidence (16 March 2013 page 9). Although you have had many articles on this subject, you have rarely given any of the essential graphical evidence. But my delight rapidly changed to horror, when I studied the graph in detail.
            A few years ago, when I was studying the subject carefully, the accepted temperature increase over the last 150 years was quoted as 0.8 degrees Celius (e.g. the 2007 IPPC report). Since then, if you study the up-to-date Wikipedia graphs, the increase looks more like 0.9 degrees. But this amount is not yet a quoted figure.
            But the increase shown on Marcott’s graph in your article was only 0.6 degrees. This difference makes a huge difference to the evidence of Global Warming.
            If the figure is only 0.6 then it was only 6,000 years since the temperature of the Earth was as hot as it is now. But, if the figure is 0.8 degrees, then it is 130,000 years since the Earth is as hot as it is now (to check this you need look at the Wikipedia general past temperatures graphs or the Vostok graphs – both given in my book). Thus this difference is crucial to the evidence that it is we humans that are causing climate change.


This a complex subject and I can’t go into too much detail in a letter (the details are all given in my book). And you might not think that this difference is all that important. But I know it will make a significant difference. The diagram you have shown can leave people with the impression that the current temperature could be natural process.
But the important thing is that the New Scientist has never yet printed the complete evidence on global warming. On the evidence of the graphs you have printed, the New Scientist would appear to favour the anti-action party. I hope this is not true.
            It is time that you printed the full evidence and so you are being just to all parties. (But I do know that the way, in which evidence is shown, is very difficult and contentious issue. The easiest option for you could be for you to simply point your readers towards my book.)


Although I have done a huge amount of work on this subject, I am certainly not one of the elite that everyone knows (e.g. Tim Flannery). But I am well qualified with a PhD in mathematics and I have been working in this field for 37 years.
            My work, although not formally published, is easily available on my website. So the 9 books I have written can all be downloaded from this site. Also my life history is certainly not normal - and so it could be of interest. It would be nice if the New Scientist could tell the world where all this good information is to be found.

            My contact details are:

            Website                       (just Google - bryden allen)
            Phone              +61 2 9797 7249
            Address           7/5 Knox St Ashfield, 2131 NSW Australia
            In public          11. – 11.30 - Saturday mornings - performing in Ashfield Mall
                                    6. – 7. - Tuesday evening St Peters Climbing Gym (holding the rope for                                     climbers without partners)


            I hope you take some action on this very important matter.
                                    Yours truly                                                    Bryden Allen



The New Scientist did not reply (apart from the usual note that my letter had been received).
            This lack of action by the New Scientist does give an indication of the huge problems that people, who wish to stop Climate Change, must face. The truth is that most people in this world do not wish to think about the changes that we must make to stop polluting our world (and so cause Climate Change). And the scientists of this world are on the whole as bad as anyone else - should such actions threaten their own particular employment.
            All people of this world are brilliantly clever at not seeing the facts that they do not wish to see. So the editors of the New Scientist do not wish to see that an article, which they have published, gives a very false impression about this matter.

            Thus we, who do wish to take action to stop Climate Change, face a very tough job indeed.



You might now also like to look back at:

either my "Home Page" (which introduces this whole website and lists all my webpages).


Updated on 10/11/2016.