Pages

Saturday, April 28, 2012

Climate hoax promoter Mann: "there really is a machine, a very organized machine out there to make sure that when the NYT runs an article about climate change, you’ll be sure they will get thousands of angry emails from climate change deniers"

Interview: Dr. Michael Mann, Climate War Veteran

If there was a medal for fighting the climate war, Dr. Michael Mann should probably get one.

...Dr. Michael Mann: That’s what book is really about. It’s about this massive disinformation campaign that has been funded by fossil fuel interests, advocates for the fossil fuel industry, front groups and organizations that have sought to manufacture this fake debate about whether or not climate change is real.

...I think in part that’s because there is so much pressure…there really is a machine, a very organized machine out there to make sure that when the NYT runs an article about climate change, you’ll be sure they will get thousands of angry emails from climate change deniers denouncing their (NYT) acceptance of the hoax of climate change. Ultimately their business model relies on advertising and so even the NYT is sensitive to that.

3p: Do you think what we have is more of a communication problem rather than a scientific one?

MM: Yes. Sometimes you’ll hear critics say we can’t act until we’re certain, until there’s proof, but science doesn’t work that way. In my book I note that proof is reserved for mathematical theorems and alcoholic beverages. Scientists are skeptics by nature – there’s never been such thing as proof in science, but there’s the weight of evidence and we act on the weight of evidence. Why is it that when it comes to climate change, where there is as much scientific consensus about the reality of human caused climate change as there is about any scientific proposition, critics demand absolute proof?

5 comments:

  1. Robert of Ottawa8:22 AM, April 28, 2012

    This is a case of thinking your opponents use the same tactics you do. There must be a word for that.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Michael Mann is spot on with his comments. The fact that every single scientific organization on the planet as well as all our national security agencies such as the CIA, the NSA and the Navy support the same position shows this to be a robust and valid theory. The deniers are, for the most part, professional bloggers with barely a degree to share amongst themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  3. My Dear Drewski,

    Your phony "scientific consensus" argument is the biggest lie of all:

    http://sbvor.blogspot.com/2010/01/meterologists-are-rightly-skeptical-on.html

    ReplyDelete