I recently was interviewed by our local newspaper “Le Nouvelliste” about global warming. This was a follow-up article on a piece where Jean-Claude Pont, science historian of self-proclaimed scientific expertise, negated the anthropological origin of current climatological changes. Why bother now ? After all, climatoskeptical views have been expressed long ago, their claims have been rebutted numerous times, by much more knowledgeable people than me. Well, this time was a bit different - several red lines were blatantly crossed.
First, Pont pretends that he is a knowledgeable scientist. That is not true. He got a diploma degree in mathematics from the ETHZ, but if he ever did research, it was in history of sciences - this is certainly a respectable field, but arguably quite different from natural sciences. Second, Pont does not stop there, as he claims that his (usurpated) science research background puts him in a better position to connect all pieces of the complex puzzle of global warming than climatologists themselves. This left me speechless - how arrogant can you be as a retired historian of sciences to claim that you understand better physics, astronomy and chemistry, none of which you ever practiced, than scientists whose career and daily bread are to try and decipher the behavior of earth’s climate. Third, with the energy strategy 2050 of the Swiss confederation now accepted by a popular vote, it seemed someone had to react and tell the truth - the message that Pont and others try to send is that the energy transition is ill-directed, useless and expensive. That is incorrect. The transition goes in the right direction, it will succeed and will not be that expensive - certainly not compared to the alternative, if any exists.
I got a full page of interview, and appeared on the front and back page of the newspaper.