Letters to the Editor: Criticism of climate scientist activism is Big Oil nonsense
Letters to the Editor
By the way, here are some of the best comments on the issue of “climategate” and the “hockey stick” used in all the “bitter” news and discussion of global change:
The editor of the Economist magazine: “I agree with Dr. Ball that the science can be debated, but, at the moment, there doesn’t seem to be any debate to be had.”
The former editor of The Economist magazine: “I find it amazing how some scientists find ‘debate’ in the issue of anthropogenic global warming – an issue where there is virtually no debate in the scientific community. The scientists who have been shown to be wrong about human-induced changes to the climate are, with rare exceptions (e.g. Dr. David Legates, University of Texas and the one example of ‘debate’ we’ve been able to find – Dr. Ball – in the mainstream media, when he is interviewed by reporters.
For a scientist to say ‘I find it amazing’ that his/her ‘findings’ may be not in accord with the consensus view is, for many, the ultimate in arrogance.”
The head of the Union of Concerned Scientists: “One has to assume that this is an ongoing attempt by the political establishment (see also the article by Andrew Revkin in the National Journal), with the implicit goal of shutting down debate and the free flow of information.”
The head of the American Association for the Advancement of Science: “It is not clear who is right. Perhaps the science is as uncertain as the political activists who have made these assertions. The one certainty is that there’s nothing to debate.”
The editor of the New York Times: “It’s impossible to know what’s true and what isn’t. ”
The president of the Royal Society: It is difficult to know what the
