For those who want to dig a little deeper into this guy's thinking I suggest the following post at WhatsUpWithThat.com where Hulme makes the apparently reasonable suggestion that it is time to retire the IPPC:
UEA Climate Scientist: possible that I.P.C.C. has run its course
Browse down to the comments and read the ones by "Jim" that are punctuated by a series of "WOWs". Here are Jim's comments:
Jim (13:41:10) :
Are we going to trust Hume to lead the charge for change???
From Lubo Motls Blog:
Hulme tells us that if the scientists are going to be listened to in the future, they must recognize the social limits of their truth seeking WOW. ;-) They must thus trade truth for influence WOW. He also says that the climate change is too important to be left to scientists WOW least of all the normal ones WOW. Hulme promotes the idea that the climate science should become a post-normal science WOW. He says that the danger of the normal science is that it assumes that the truth is found before the policies are created WOW.
In the post-normal science that he recommends, science is ready to change as it rubs against society WOW and the disputes should focus on sociological issues such as funding, personal evaluations, and the format of presentations WOW. In order to make progress with the climate change, we must take science off center stage WOW. Hulme correctly says that an honest scientist cant answer questions like what level of CO2 is too much because the answer depends on a value judgment which is not a part of science but the only reason why he says so is that he wants to urge scientists to become post-normal scientists who claim to be able to answer such questions WOW.
If I summarize it, he wants to destroy the difference between science and politics completely. I just find it rather breathtaking. This is not a generic crank from Real Climate or Not Even Wrong. This is officially a director of an institute that pretends to be a scientific institute whom we have praised for certain things.
Oops. Make that IPCC not IPPC.