The scandal has cast a wide spectrum of doubt
on climate scientists in general, even those far removed from any accusation of wrongdoing.
• In August, Science Careers ran an article by Eli Kintisch about the increasing
pressure on climate scientists to engage in public outreach and communication.
In an editorial on January 5, 2012, the top scientific journal Nature
calls on climate scientists to be «even more energetic in taking their message to citizens.»
Aside from government - ordered
muzzling on climate scientists (as happened to Hansen and others), there is a «chilling effect» on people's speech regarding climate science.
Past warmings are not an analogue for our present situation, which to my mind places a greater burden of
proof on climate scientists regarding evidence for climate change.
«I'd say it's getting a little long in the tooth,» Mr. Horner, who is known for filing voluminous Freedom of Information Act requests seeking
information on climate scientists.
«He has been instrumental in orchestrating the attacks
on climate scientists over the past decade in the form of vexatious and frivolous FOIA demands, efforts to force scientists to turn over all of their personal email,» says Dr. Michael Mann, a climate scientist targeted by Horner.
The entire «ClimateGate» non-scandal, as another, was hyped by at least 20 different Koch - funded groups as a coordinated attempt to cast
doubt on climate scientists.
I, like you,
rely on climate scientist to accurately and usefully communicate their findings so that I can make a reasoned decision.
All of this abuse excludes the public attacks
on climate scientists which have been made, and continue to be made, by some newspaper columnists and many bloggers who see action on climate change as an affront on freedom or a socialist plot.
, has a trove of hard - hitting
commentaries on climate scientist Peter Gleick's theft and publication of the Heartland Institute's fund - raising documents and apparent forgery of a «confidential» climate strategy memo.
I'm now trying to broaden my search for information beyond just the CRU hack, so here's a plea for any information or leads on any
cyber-attack on climate scientists or climate activists.
it is hard to understand why an attack
on climate scientists via incompetent SNA and faulty reasoning should be paid for by the NIAAA, or the Army.
Awareness of the threats to mental health posed by climate change leads to questions about the potential
impacts on climate scientists because they are immersed in depressing information and may face apathy, denial and even hostility from others.
Between them, Greenpeace says, these groups and individuals have spread misinformation about climate science and led a sustained
assault on climate scientists and green alternatives to fossil fuels.
People in high positions tend to have many «enemies» and due to the high pressure currently
put on climate scientists, they can be extremely sensitive not to be associated with ideas they do not (want) to represent.
Many recent assaults on climate science and, more disturbingly,
on climate scientists by climate change deniers are typically driven by special interests or dogma, not by an honest effortto provide an alternative theory that credibly satisfies the evidence.
But it's another to spend a decade, as Inhofe has since, making ever more caricatured
attacks on climate scientists in the name of preserving the country's dependence on fossil fuels.
Reports of personal attacks
on climate scientists, including harassment, legal challenges, and even death threats, have created a hostile environment that inhibits the free exchange of scientific findings and makes it difficult for factual information to reach policymakers and the public, the AAAS Board of Directors said in a statement of concern.
Read «Statement of the Board of Directors of the American Association for the Advancement of Science Regarding Personal Attacks
on Climate Scientists.»
Statement of the Board of Directors of the American Association for the Advancement of Science Regarding Personal Attacks
on Climate Scientists 29 June 2011
I've often examined the stylings of Lorne Gunter, who specializes in hyperventilating attacks
on climate scientists, complemented by repackaged press releases from the likes of Marc Morano (as seen in Gunter's recent, um, discussion of the work of Mojib Latif).
Earlier this year, I criticized his habit of launching largely overheated and unsubstantiated attacks
on climate scientists, but credited him for assembling a talented research team centered on the gifted data analyst Robert Rohde (you'll hear from Rohde below), to take a new approach to compiling and analyzing temperature records going back two centuries.
Muller, who in the past has made oversimplified and grossly overstated (to my mind) attacks
on climate scientists and former Vice President Al Gore, was mainly restrained at the hearing, focusing on his goals for the temperature analysis.
This is a very important post and BAMS article — since the cooling nonsense remains the most common attack
on climate scientists I get when speaking or writing on the subject.
With all the distracting attacks
on climate scientists, these scientific realities are getting drowned out in all the noise.
But his sharp attacks
on climate scientists have made him a popular witness at hearings convened by Republican lawmakers aiming to highlight doubts about climate change (explore his 2015 testimony at a Senate hearing and 2010 House testimony to get the idea).
Second, we learned that the authors first tried to get some of the newspapers that have been publishing dubious attacks
on climate scientists to publish the piece as an op - ed, but were rejected.
And the Center for Media and Democracy's claim that Oil Money Funds Climate Deniers and Attacks
on Climate Scientists (backup).
The letter was drafted before Cuccinelli's action, but water expert Peter Gleick, one of the authors, told the Washington Post that the attorney general's demand «is precisely the kind of attack
on climate scientists that the letter criticizes.»