Journal of Scientifc Exploration, Vol. 29, No. 4, pp. 637–648, 2015 0892-3310/15 COMMENTARY Professor Bauer Has It Backwards PETER A. BANCEL Institut Métapsychique International, Paris, France In his Essay Review “Climate Change Science or Climate Change Prop- aganda?” in this issue, Henry Bauer informs us that there is no valid scientific support for anthropogenic global warming (AGW), that predictions of future warming are erroneous, and that a propaganda campaign is being perpetrated by mainstream science to cover up these embarrassing errors. Worse, the campaign is succeeding as pundits and the media buy into the received dogma and the consequences appear dire. The world risks widespread and unnecessary economic disruption by responding to an illusory problem, and “highly informed experts” who challenge the climate change consensus are being hurtfully sneered at as they are dismissed out of hand. The last point may be familiar to Professor Bauer, who is no stranger to readers of this Journal’s pages. He has long held a contrarian position on the causes of AIDS, and I imagine that the rejection of his views can sting. Still, it’s not clear what exactly has motivated Professor Bauer’s wide-ranging Essay Review, unless it’s just the lure of crusading against the imposed groupthink of mainstream science. That is fine and may well offer some good sparring as long as one prepares one’s case well. Unfortunately, Professor Bauer has not done so, and his arguments against AGW don’t stand up when confronted with the data and research. To make his case, Exhibit A is the booklet Climate Change: Evidence and Causes published by the London Royal Society in collaboration with the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, which he dissects for us in his Essay Review. In a nutshell, he argues that since the science is patently wrong, disseminating a pamphlet affirming it amounts to proof of collaborative propagandizing. Along the way, we learn that comparisons with previous documents, duplicitous choices of wording, and even the use of British spelling provide supporting evidence of the collusion. However, it’s not necessary to debate these points. To undo Professor Bauer’s argument, it suffices to expose the errors in his claim that the science is wrong. The rest of his propaganda argument falls after that. As the Essay does not describe the basics of climate science, it’s perhaps