I was very disturbed by your recent letter, and your attempt to get others to endorse it. Not only do I disagree with the content of this letter, but I also believe that you have severely distorted the IPCC "view" when you say that "the latest IPCC assessment makes a convincing economic case for immediate control of emissions." ...
Your approach of trying to gain scientific credibility for your personal views by asking people to endorse your letter is reprehensible. ...
When scientists color the science with their own PERSONAL views or make categorical statements without presenting the evidence for such statements, they have a clear responsibility to state that that is what they are doing. You have failed to do so. Indeed, what you are doing is, in my view, a form of dishonesty more subtle but no less egregious than the statements made by the greenhouse skeptics, Michaels, Singer et al. I find this extremely disturbing.
Tom Wigley
Wednesday, November 23, 2011
1997: Warmists Mike Hulme et al want warmist Tom Wigley to endorse a climate hoax letter; Tom uses words like "very disturbed", "reprehensible", "dishonesty" and "egregious" in his reply
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comment:
Real scientists are altruists, while PANICKED parasitic humanoids FEAR open dialogue, transparency, autarky, and destroy societies if they are not stopped in time, see pharaos, Romans, Aztecs, Mayans, Incas etc etc.
Post a Comment