From the "Every other story in the news and on blogs is incredibly disturbing, depressing and evil and I'm about to throw myself off a building unless I hear something positive and happy right now" department comes this little gem from the Athens Banner-Herald...seems out of all the names the elementary school kids could have picked, the kids chose to name the bear "DJ" in honor of the great DJ Shockley who visits the school on a regular basis to meet and read with the kids. Now if that doesn't warm your heart then I don't know what will.
10 comments:
"Now if that doesn't warm your heart than I don't know what will."
Greenhouse gases?
And by the way, I'm not sure how evil that article is. It doesn't sound like the money is going to anybody willing to create lies out of thin air.
"The letters, sent to scientists in Britain, the US and elsewhere, attack the UN's panel as 'resistant to reasonable criticism and dissent and prone to summary conclusions that are poorly supported by the analytical work' and ask for essays that 'thoughtfully explore the limitations of climate model outputs'."
Evil I tell you! EVIL!! And by the way, no offense to you Josh for the link...its just that your blog is the first thing I think of when someone mentions the word "disturbing".
That being said, it doesn't seem consistent with the laudable goals of academics, science and research to be bribed by big oil into releasing a counterargument. If the authors truly believed in their work wouldn't they just release their studies on their own accord?
Well, I believe in the education of children, but I'm not willing to do it for free. I have no doubt you will be a principled and ethical lawyer, but you'll be accepting a paycheck for it, no?
I'm not that educated about the daily lives of scientists, but I doubt it's very rare for papers to be commissioned (yes, for money) by various groups.
I am sure these researchers are getting a salary from their respective employers, think tanks, universities, etc. Most likely big oil is not targetting your car mechanic or local comptroller who just happens to "dabble" in climatology. To take a bribe on top of what they are already being paid is a bit unseemly.
This money is being provided by a think tank, the American Enterprise Institute. Of course, this is a thinktank partially funded by Exxon (not fully funded as the article suggests; just $1.6 million out of over $30 million overall).
However, every thinktank is funded by somebody, in many instances partially by corporations: be it Coors (the Heritage Foundation), Koch Industries, aka Purina and Georgia-Pacific (Cato Institute) or Microsoft (the Independant Institute).
But obviously Exxon wouldn't offer bribe money to researchers they've already employed...Exxon would have just released that data if they had it already.
I don't know why you choose to characterize it as "bribe money." The think tank is commissioning papers that "thoughtfully explore the limitations of climate model outputs."
It is not looking for scientists to suddenly switch positions and lie for the money; it is looking for scientists willing to put together a paper based on their own research (yes, there are scientists who believe global warming is not caused by man.)
If there are so many scientists who believe that global warming is natural and in fact, NOT caused by man, then why is Exxon offering bribe/reward/motivational dollars publicly to find these legion of scientists?
Wasn't this post about a bear named DJ Shockley? I forget.
Post a Comment