I was always wondering why media are not looking into the economic and political interests of climate advocates - for some reasons, people conserned about the furture of climate (and the environment in general), are considered as being truly altruistic. This is certainly not the case, and it should be the role of the media to look critically.
An example is provided by the UK-newspaper Telegraph, which ...
raises Questions over business deals of UN climate change guru Dr Rajendra Pachauri on 20 December 2009 (and spells out the obvious, that this gentleman has no backgorund in climate science; and the less obvious, that he has a background in fossil fuel industry). The accused fights back in an article of Times of India with the title Pachauri slams charges about conflict of interest (21 December 2009).
Dear Hans, some years ago Eduardo attended a climate conference (I believe in Zaragoza, Spain). He was interviewed by a journal whose name I do not remember, probably Mr. Zorita can find out which one was. A clearly biased journalist just wanted of Eduardo some strong and very alarmist headline. Eduardo pointed out it is important to distinguish science from politics. It explained carefully to the journalist that some of the uncertainties in science are exactly that, uncertainties that enrich the science itself. But I remember he insisted politics cannot demand from science strong statements that belong to the realm of politics and not to the realm of science.
ReplyDeleteMr. Pachauri, in my humble opinion, did precisely the opposite. He has been promoting for years a collusion among science and politics. In the end the result is neither science nor politics. It is a deliberate intent of using scientists as hostages of politics. Sadly I believe some scientists, not all of course, within climatology, have enthusiastically supported this preposterous attitude whatever their reasons. Now it is impossible not to believe that some of the scientists, not all of them of course, had a hidden agenda never investigated by the media 'cause the media were in some sense an active part of the plot.
best
rafa
NO! NO! It is not the role of the media, but primaily of science. R. Pachauri says he is a climatologist, many present themself in the same way, and how many scientific organisations object?
ReplyDeleteDear Professor Storch:
ReplyDeleteI am curious what you have to say about Lord Monkton and the things which he has to say. If you have not heard of him, I am attaching a link to his recent speech to the free market institute in Minnesota where he concludes that there is no such thing as anthropogenic climate change:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=stij8sUybx0
Thank you very much,
Piotr Derus.
I do not have to say anything on Lord Monkton. As far as I know he is not a climate scientist, i.e., is not applying the scientific methodology, but an politician weighing arguments according to political utility. That is his good right, but we are also in our good right if we disregard him as an irrelevant voice. There are enough relevant voices, so let's forget this gentleman. My privat opinion.
ReplyDelete