Lord Lawson, the former chancellor, proposed the motion by addressing various myths promoted by the ‘relics’ of the opposition. The average temperature rise since fossil fuels were first used had been barely one degree Celsius, he said, and no warming had been observed this century. The cost of ‘decarbonising’ the economy, he added, would be catastrophic. Oil was not about to run out and ‘winnable gas’ was available in ever greater abundance. Yet schoolchildren were being deliberately scared to death about global warming by their teachers. ‘This is not just outrageous but wicked.’
Simon Singh, opposing, said that he was more willing to credit the 97 per cent of scientists who were worried about climate change than the campaigners and journalists opposed. Sceptical opinion was animated by a ‘love of mavericks’ even though 99 per cent of mavericks turn out to be wrong. ‘Follow the smart money and the smart arguments.’

Get Britain's best politics newsletters
Register to get The Spectator's insight and opinion straight to your inbox. You can then read two free articles each week.
Already a subscriber? Log in
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in