Global Warming Doubter Story Pulled

curtisk

Wed Jun 14 13:59:07 -0700 2006

manage

Bruce, thanks for the due-diligence
An online editor that actually EDITS!.....I gotta sit down for a few minutes :)

Global Warming Doubter Story Pulled

President4242

Wed Jun 14 14:31:22 -0700 2006

manage

From the link "non-lobby, non-industry, non-government".  I think at this point to deny global warming ENTIRELY you'd have to add "blind" to that list- or at least "living someplace where there aren't any real mountains".

Having said that I still doubt that man has anything to do with global warming- but the only way we'll know for sure is to actually try the measures of those who think we can reverse it and see if it reverses....

Global Warming Doubter Story Pulled

Geek Times Infinity

Wed Jun 14 14:38:32 -0700 2006

manage

Intelligent move.  I happen to be a supporter of the notion that human activity is contributing to climate change on a global scale.  However, I also believe that the data will find its own way to supporting that conclusion.

Even Al Gore will tell you that we do not have complete, hardcore, irrefutable proof that global warming is the nightmare many people declare it to be.  However, there is enough strong, validated, refereed, verified, rock solid scientific information to show that it is a subject of concern and warrants serious investigation separate from political snipery and name calling.  Additionally, there is enough evidence to show that preventative measures taken now with technology available today are a good overall idea whether a warming problem is present or not.

Think of global warming prevention in a light similar to that on the issue of disposal of radioactive waste from nuclear power plants.  1) it's a stupid way to boil water. 2) where do you safely (really) dispose of the spent fuel?  Once #2 is addressed - completely - #1 becomes a little less stupid.

Global Warming Doubter Story Pulled

Dave

Wed Jun 14 15:01:48 -0700 2006

manage

I'm of the opinion that there's money behind all of it -- both sides. Unfortunately, this is one of those old causes that managed to get a cottage industry behind it. Like all industry, it has to market its product and generally exaggerate claims in order to get the public's attention. If global warming went away, people would lose their jobs. There's a real, fiscal disincentive to spread any truth or keep a sense of perspective on the matter.

I don't know the truth about global warming, but I do know that the truth will never be told as long as there's money to be made. Books must be sold, you know. Rallies must be held. It's just The Way of Things.

That said, it's nice to see that at least somebody is keeping more than a modicum of journalistic integrity. Good call, Bruce.

Global Warming Doubter Story Pulled

N. Dan Smith

Wed Jun 14 15:02:28 -0700 2006

manage

Haha, Slashdot published it right when Technocrat pulled it.

Global Warming Doubter Story Pulled

Bruce Perens

Wed Jun 14 15:42:59 -0700 2006

manage

Geez. And those folks get a readership about 1000 times the size of ours.

Global Warming Doubter Story Pulled

hal9000_sn3

Wed Jun 14 16:01:39 -0700 2006

manage

You know that they say that size isn't everything, right?

All the press releases printed in full at Technocrat, and you pull a link to *this*?!

Martin Blank

Wed Jun 14 16:30:08 -0700 2006

manage

Seriously, that's a major case of hypocrisy.  I see press releases here that come from universities and companies that are not vetted for bias -- hell, sometimes they're not even fully read by the editors, as evidence by occasional headlines that completely miss the mark -- and yet the fact that this guy works for a PR firm completely negates his credibility.

Astounding.  Simply astounding.

All the press releases printed in full at Technocrat, and you pull a link to *this*?!

Bruce Perens

Wed Jun 14 16:46:45 -0700 2006

manage

A press release is treated differently from what is purportedly a journalistic article. If the fellow had said who was paying him and labeled it as an editorial, it would have been entirely different.

Bruce

All the press releases printed in full at Technocrat, and you pull a link to *this*?!

Martin Blank

Wed Jun 14 17:08:22 -0700 2006

manage

Did I miss something that said that it was paid, or is this just a presumption based on the fact that his employer is a PR company?  If the latter is true, does my employment by a county goverment nullify what I say if it's in favor of a controversial project?

All the press releases printed in full at Technocrat, and you pull a link to *this*?!

Bruce Perens

Wed Jun 14 17:36:28 -0700 2006

manage

Maybe. It would depend on the circumstances, and how (as editor) I felt about your sincerity. In this case the fellow's job is to get press for a particular viewpoint. So, I have a pretty big question about his sincerity.

Bruce

All the press releases printed in full at Technocrat, and you pull a link to *this*?!

Martin Blank

Wed Jun 14 17:16:47 -0700 2006

manage

By the way -- it does indicate that it's an editorial.  Right above the headline, it says "Guest Column" in standard H3 style.  Now, I don't know about your news sources, but in most newspapers and online news sites that I've read in my three decades and change, a "guest column" indicates someone spelling out their opinion or news analysis on a one-time basis, and hence the rough equivalent of an editorial.

All the press releases printed in full at Technocrat, and you pull a link to *this*?!

Bruce Perens

Wed Jun 14 17:32:48 -0700 2006

manage

Well, I guess "Guest Column" could indeed mean editorial. Or advertisement :-) Why can't they just say editorial?

All the press releases printed in full at Technocrat, and you pull a link to *this*?!

Martin Blank

Wed Jun 14 17:40:42 -0700 2006

manage

Because in publishing, an editorial is usually an unsigned work that represents the position of the publishing entity as a whole.  The LA Times Editorial Board, for example, prints 2-4 editorials in most editions, and publishes syndicated and guest columns on the page opposite the editorials.  They are identified as columns, not editorials.

All the press releases printed in full at Technocrat, and you pull a link to *this*?!

Bruce Perens

Wed Jun 14 17:44:08 -0700 2006

manage

Well, I still have a question about his sincerity.

Bruce

All the press releases printed in full at Technocrat, and you pull a link to *this*?!

Martin Blank

Wed Jun 14 20:03:26 -0700 2006

manage

In that case, I feel the better solution in this case would have been to either add something to the article, or to post something about it as a commenter.

I head up a fair-sized online community of my own.  I know what it means to make judgement calls that will be seen in public, and those calls have an effect on the perception of the site.  I've made good choices before, and I've made bad ones.  I've pulled threads that I deemed to be detrimental to the community, and took flak before because of it.  I have always taken that into account the next time I faced a similar decision.

My first post was made with a fair amount of annoyance, and the tone may have come off more sharply than I intended.  If so, then I apologize.  Being in the line of fire, I prefer signal flags over bow shots.  I still disagree with your decision, but it's not going to cause me to stop checking in here because most of the common posters here are of a reasonably high quality, and there are those who actively ask questions seeking clarification and obviously want to learn.  Besides, I've leeched enough material from the PHPTR site that I feel obliged to give back to your endeavors.

All the press releases printed in full at Technocrat, and you pull a link to *this*?!

Bruce Perens

Wed Jun 14 22:06:56 -0700 2006

manage

Well, the link to the article is still on the front page. It just has a message of deprecation around it :-)

Thanks for the comments, and thanks for being around.

Bruce

All the press releases printed in full at Technocrat, and you pull a link to *this*?!

Kagenin

Thu Jun 15 09:44:37 -0700 2006

manage

And quite frankly, I'd rather have that than anything else.

I think everyone here appriciates the fine job you do around here Bruce.  This is one of the reasons I keep coming back.  An editor with integrity.  What a concept :p

press releases

zogger

Wed Jun 14 18:06:05 -0700 2006

manage

For the record, I read the articles I post, although I am human and will admit to occassional failure to adequately summarize, although I try. Some times the subjects are over my head, but I still find them interesting and hope others more knowledgeable will comment. I cannot *possibly* be a guru expert in all the subjects covered here.

In this article I posted, I took it as an opinion piece by the author,I mean within the first few sentences that was obvious at least to me, and felt it had enough other data contained therein to be interesting and to garner some conversation, and also as a balance to a lot of the "pro" 'humans cause global warming' artices I have put up.

Anecdotally and personally, I am of the opinion that any climate change is an "all of the above" scenario, a combination of natural terrestrial cyclical events, solar influences, human actions, and "other" as yet unknown or un-named tings. All of it take as a gestalt. I don't think it is one or the other..

As to press releases-sure! They are labeled as such and if you follow the story food chains back from a lot of "mainstream" articles on this or that, that's where they get their copy from, so I go there after a bit of searching instead of linking to someone's rehash or near-copy. If there's an easy reference to find say the peer review paper, etc, even on a pay per view article I try to find at least the abstract link. To me, a "press release" or "news release" is just that, a source you can use that is released by the originators as long as proper attribution is used and you don't change the copy. I think it is more fair to go to the original source and under fair use if it isn't a release I only do a short quoted excerpt and the summary, if it is a "release" I just copy the whole thing and provide a link to it. AFAIK this is the proper thing to do, but I am always open to constructive criticism.

press releases

Martin Blank

Wed Jun 14 19:56:06 -0700 2006

manage

if it is a "release" I just copy the whole thing and provide a link to it. AFAIK this is the proper thing to do, but I am always open to constructive criticism.

I'm not going to spend much time on it, since I've brought it up elsewhere.  I don't have a problem with press releases appearing here, but some of them are terribly long.  I do wish that summaries and extracts with links to the original source would be used for those longer than four or five paragraphs.  If someone submits a column on their own, or if there is reason to believe that the original material may be pulled (and it's legal to copy it in full), I don't mind that being posted in its entirety, but the lengthy press releases get tiring.

Global Warming Doubter Story Pulled

Beryllium Sphere(r)

Wed Jun 14 16:59:53 -0700 2006

manage

There's a long list of "skeptics" whose noble efforts are supported, doubtless out of sheer public spirit, by ExxonMobil at http://www.exxonsecrets.org/

Global Warming Doubter Story Pulled

cynicalmoose

Wed Jun 14 17:20:07 -0700 2006

manage

Bruce - because RSS feeds may be updated slowly, and people may link to the stories later pulled, a server-side nice-to-have would be something telling people that the story had been pulled if they get there, rather than just "Sorry, there is nothing at the path /d/2006/6/14/4442" or its ilk.

Global Warming Doubter Story Pulled

Bruce Perens

Wed Jun 14 17:44:54 -0700 2006

manage

OK, I did that.

Global Warming Doubter Story Pulled

maethorechannen

Thu Jun 15 02:35:04 -0700 2006

manage

But it does seem that the "con" side of the argument often comes from people who are paid to have those opinions.

There's the Envriospin blog, which isn't paid for  by the oil industry - it's by a professor from the University of London. It doesn't argue that climate change or even global warming isn't happening - but it does argue that climate change is normal (as it's been happing throughout geological history), and that the climate really is too complex to just lay the entire blame for global warming on humans.

Global Warming Doubter Story Pulled

Beryllium Sphere(r)

Thu Jun 15 18:33:04 -0700 2006

manage

I took a look at that one. Should I try again? They lost me with

for hybrid electric cars to become effective, a major breakthrough in battery technology is required,

. Since I know differently from years of first-hand experience, that statement was kind of indigestible.

Global Warming Doubter Story Pulled

maethorechannen

Fri Jun 16 00:50:36 -0700 2006

manage

Should I try again?

Seeing as a lack of decent battery technology is still a "conventional wisdom" even though it might not be accurate (I even keep hearing this from greens as well), I wouldn't knock the site too badly for that one (what about his 5 1/2 other reasons why the cumbustion engine will be with us for a long time?).

Or to put it another way, if a "green" website (for a lack of a better term) posted a conventional wisdom (not even as an entire article, but as part of a larger one) about the environment that you knew was wrong, would you stop reading the site?

Global Warming Doubter Story Pulled

Tim Lambert

Thu Jun 15 12:19:48 -0700 2006

manage

If anyone is interested, I've written up what is wrong with the science in the pulled story. Link.

Global Warming Doubter Story Pulled

Simon

Thu Jun 15 14:24:58 -0700 2006

manage

I've got my doubts about global warming too.

I have very few doubts about global warming. The global surface temperature changes, the warmest summers on record, the breakdown of the regular southern oscillation cycle, and the melting of things that have been frozen for over 10,000 years, even the ice free navigation of the North West passage (even if the captain was a skeptic), are pretty conclusive indicators of climate change.

The big question is how much of it is ascribable to human activity, and how far will it go.

I keep thinking of the deforestation, and daisy world models, but hopefully the oceans are more important than the trees.

Global Warming Doubter Story Pulled

Tom Harris

Sun Jun 25 16:55:53 -0700 2006

manage

My work on this article (ond on this one as well: http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/financialpost/story.html?id=d0235a70-33f1-45b3-803b-829b1b3542ef&p=1 was funded by an Order of Canada recipient who has nothing to do with oil and gas but funds scientists to do climate change work as part of his philanthropic work - here is one of the papers he gave much of the money to have done:

ftp://rock.geosociety.org/pub/GSAToday/gt0307.pdf

and here is a layperson's interpretation of the paper:

http://www.envirotruth.org/news-cosmic.cfm

There are hundreds of papers put out in main stream literature in recent years that cast very serious doubt on politically correct climate change theories.

Regarding Professor Carter, here is what he says to those who accuse him of being in the pay of big oil (he gave me permission to send this about):

Sent: June 17, 2006 2:21 AM
To: Tom Harris
Subject: RE: "The gods must be laughing" getting good publicity south of the border

Dear Tom,

As you probably know, as soon as any scientist writes an anti-green opinion piece on any subject, the greens scour the world for evidence - however weak - to link them with industry interests. In my case, the fact that I have written for Tech Central Station is the source of claims that I am "paid by Exxon" (which, of course, I am not). This then merits a listing on the two "character assassination" websites:

which get endlessly listed on blog sites as evidence that I am paid by Exxon.

In answer to any queries, I suggest that you point people to my website biography, at:

There, inter alia, they will find the following statement:

"Bob's research has been supported by grants from competitive public research agencies, especially the Australian Research Council (ARC). He receives no research funding from special interest organisations such as environmental groups, energy companies or government departments. Bob strives to provide critical and dispassionate analysis based upon scientific principles, demonstrated facts and a knowledge of the scientific literature."

On top of which, the very idea that I (or any other established scientist of merit) would accept money from a vested interest group in return for giving a public opinion in their favour is simply risible. You can only laugh at it, for those who assert it will not have their minds changed by denial, evidence or logic.

All the best.

Bob

Professor R.M. Carter
Marine Geophysical Laboratory
James Cook University
Townsville, Qld. 4811
AUSTRALIA

Phone: +61-7-4781-4397
Fax: +61-7-4781-4334
Home: +61-7-4775-1268
Mobile: 0419-701-139

Web home page: http://members.iinet.net.au/~glrmc/

---- Original message ----
>Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 00:58:21 -0400
>From: "Tom Harris"
>Subject: RE: "The gods must be laughing" getting good publicity south of the border
>To: "'Bob Carter'"
>
>What would you suggest should I say to people who bring up that Bob
>Carter - Exxon issue (besides, "So what? I don't know where his funding
>comes from and don't really care. Look at what he is saying and the
>important research he has done and judge the science issue for yourself).