Public scepticism prompts Science Museum to rename climate exhibition

antarctic_tempBy Ben Webster

The Science Museum is revising the contents of its new climate science gallery to reflect the wave of scepticism that has engulfed the issue in recent months.

The decision by the 100-year-old London museum reveals how deeply scientific institutions have been shaken by the public’s reaction to revelations of malpractice by climate scientists.

The museum is abandoning its previous practice of trying to persuade visitors of the dangers of global warming. It is instead adopting a neutral position, acknowledging that there are legitimate doubts about the impact of man-made emissions on the climate.

Even the title of the £4 million gallery has been changed to reflect the museum’s more circumspect approach. The museum had intended to call it the Climate Change Gallery, but has decided to change this to Climate Science Gallery to avoid being accused of presuming that emissions would change the temperature.

Last October the museum launched a temporary exhibition called “Prove It! All the evidence you need to believe in climate change”. The museum said at the time that the exhibition had been designed to demonstrate “through scientific evidence that climate change is real and requires an urgent solution”.

Chris Rapley, the museum’s director, told The Times that it was taking a different approach after observing how the climate debate had been affected by leaked e-mails and overstatements of the dangers of global warming. He said: “We have come to realise, given the way this subject has become so polarised over the past three to four months, that we need to be respectful and welcoming of all views on it.”

Read the rest of this story at the London Times.

  • Neil F. AGWD/BSD

    Wow! Never thought I’d see the day. A step in the right direction I think. Won’t be seeing anything similar here in the states unfortunately. This is really a good example of the state of journalism in this country. Climategate was a top story in the British press, but here it has only been mentioned in passing and downplayed by the media. And usually the only commentary that makes it over the air is apologetic sympathisers saying how it was all taken out of context.

  • Rob N. Hood

    Un oh. Another win in the right-wing column, huh? Big surprise. I guess that puts another crimp in the paranoia re: Obama and Gore taking over the country and the planet for socialism, er, I mean communism.

    I guess healthcare reform is the new proof of that…

    Today, the Democratic Party is larger than the Republican Party by a large margin. Both have political problems: The Republicans, as the smaller party relies on motivating their base with distorted Chicken-Little issues, as well as controlling the voting apparatus and voting rolls. The Republican base (extremists and Libertarians), empowered by the MSM and right-wing propaganda machine unleashed during the Clinton and George W. Bush Administrations, has separated from the herd, and is demanding a return to a white-centric, Christian, chaste heterosexual, armed, fictional utopia.

  • Hal Goar

    This, I think is, is too “cute”. I get the feeling they are patronizing the people who ask questions of the science, with a wink and a nod. Don’t get me wrong, at least they are fielding the questions, I applaud them for that. I get the feeling from the article that they are not serious about debating the issue. It’s kind of like a smart car, yea it’s a car, but not a “real” car.

  • paul wenum

    They are starting to think and not nod their heads in agreement.

A project of Minnesota Majority, hosted and maintained by Minnesotans for Global Warming.