Citaat:
Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door exodus
Waarom ga je niet in op de argumenten van de film en zeg je dat die man boos is dat er selectief geknipt is?
Ik zou graag de argumenten in de film ontkracht zien. Namelijk dat de zon het klimaat stuurt zoals in de docu aangehaald wordt. En dat het CO2 gewoon het temperatuurverschil volgt dat de zon veroorzaakt, met een vertraging.
|
Dat deed ik al gedeeltelijk in mijn vorige post. En
hier kan je een uitgebreide kritiek vinden van een Brits wetenschapper op die documentaire.
Maar - en daar kunnen conspirationisten onmogelijk bezwaar tegen hebben - het is best interessant om toch ook eens te kijken naar de wetenschappers die in de documentaire aan bod komen. Want dat doet toch ook vragen rijzen. Vooral omdat ze allemaal worden voorgesteld als actieve wetenschappers:
Citaat:
Here is a little more information on some of the people who appeared on the programme:
Fred Singer. Despite the caption on the programme, Singer has retired from the University of Virginia and has not had a single article accepted for any peer-reviewed scientific journal for 20 years. His main work has been as a hired gun for business interests to undermine scientific research on environmental and health matters. Before turning to climate change denial he has argued that CFCs do not cause ozone depletion and second hand smoke does not cause cancer (more… ). In 1990 he founded “The Science and Environment Policy Project”, which aggressively contradicts climate science and has received direct funding from Exxon, Shell, Unocal and ARCO. Exxon is also among the funders ($20,000 in 1998 and 2000)
Patrick Michaels is the most prominent US climate change denier. In the programme he claimed “I’ve never been paid a nickel by the old and gas companies” which is a curious claim. According to the US journalist Ross Gebspan Michaels has received direct funding from, among others German Coal Mining Association ($49,000), Edison Electric Institute ($15,000), and the Western Fuels Association ($63,000) an association of US coal producing interests (more…). The WFA is one of the most powerful forces in the US actively denying the basic science of climate change, funding, amongs other things, the Greening Earth Society which is directed by Patrick Michaels. Tom Wigley, one of the leading IPCC scientists, describes Michaels work as “a catalog of misrepresentation and misinterpretation”. (More on Michaels…)
Philip Stott was captioned as a Professor at the University of London although he is retired and is therefore free of any academic accountability. Stott is a geographer by training and has no qualifications in climate science. Since retiring Stott has aimed to become Britain’s leading anti-green pundit dedicating himself to wittily criticizing rainforest campaigns (with Patrick Moore), advocating genetic engineering and claiming that “global warming is the new fundamentalist religion.”
Patrick Moore is Stott’s Canadian equivalent. Since a very personal and painful falling out with Greenpeace in 1986 Moore has put his considerable campaigning energies into undermining environmentalists, especially his former friends and colleagues. Typical of his rhetoric was his claim in the programme that environmentalists were “anti-human” and “treat humans as scum”. Throughout the 1990s Moore worked as lead consultant for the British Columbian Timber Products Association undermining Greenpeace’s international campaign to protect old growth forest there. Whenever he has the chance he also makes strong public statements in favour of genetic engineering, nuclear power, logging the Amazon, and industrial fishing- all, strangely, lead campaigns for Greenpeace (more on Moore..)
Piers Corbyn has no academic status and his role in such programmes is to promote his own weather prediction business. He has steadfastly refused to ever subject his climatological theories to any form of external review or scrutiny.
Tim Ball was captioned as the University of Winnipeg. In fact he left in 1996 since when he has run political campaigns through two organisations he helped found: the Natural Resources Stewardship Project and the Friends of Science which, according to their websites aim to run “a proactive grassroots campaign to counter the Kyoto Protocol”; and “encourage and assist the Canadian Federal Government to re-evaluate the Kyoto Protocol”. Ian Clark is also on the board of the NRSP.
|
Bron
Maakt dat hun beweringen per definite onwaar? Natuurlijk niet, maar het vraagt toch op zijn minst om een kritische benadering van hetgeen ze vertellen... Zeker aangezien andere wetenschappers (die overigens veel talrijker zijn) zo kritisch worden benaderd!
En de reportagemaker is ook alles behalve een onbesproken figuur, die duidelijk in het verleden al blijk heeft gegeven van intellectuele oneerlijkheid en het nastreven van een eigen (politieke) agenda: zie
hier en
hier.