Four errors of fact, two innuendos, one serious distortion, and one uncredited image, any one of which should render an editorial unpublishable. Yet the Gazette’s editorial contained all of them.
Leasing solar panels and acquiring an electric vehicle helped clear a mental block that had kept me from writing much about industrial climate disruption for about two years.
Scientists are as sure of industrial climate disruption as they are that smoking causes lung cancer. So why hasn’t the international community made progress toward addressing climate disruption? There are at least four reasons.
Harris’ stated goals in his commentaries are diametrically opposed to the language and arguments he uses in support of those goals. Either he’s incompetent at public relations, or he’s not actually interested in moving forward the public debate on industrial climate disruption.
Tom Harris distorts the maturity of global warming science and imagines expertise where little exists
Tom Harris’ recent commentaries distort the maturity of the science underlying industrial climate disruption and conflate the real expertise of climate scientists with the imagined expertise of most “opinion leaders,” engineers, and economists. Part Four of Six.
Recent commentaries by Tom Harris of the International Climate Science Coalition invoke a bizarro world where ignorance equals knowledge, where climate science can’t be true unless it’s transcendently True, and where there can be no unequivocal conclusions. Part Three of Six.
Tom Harris of the International Climate Science Coalition is calling for the end of illogical arguments in the public discussion about climate disruption. But it’s hard to take his calls serious given all the illogical arguments and errors he makes in his various commentaries. Part Two of Six.
S&R reviewed eight related commentaries written by Tom Harris of the International Climate Science Coalition since mid-December. We found that the commentaries represent tone trolling and are packed them with distortions, errors, hypocrisy, and more. Part One of Six.
While Bastach quoted extensively from the CNN story about the new poll, his story shows no indication that he dove any deeper than copying and pasting from CNN. When S&R dug into the poll itself, we found that those details reversed several of Bastach’s claims.
If global warming was shifted to the backburner, fighting it might generate less opposition. In an opinion piece at the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Dawn Stover recently wrote: Apparently most Americans have […]