The Art and Motivation of Editorializing Science

authordefault
on

Let’s see if the the Washington Times will actually print this:

Dear Editor,

In a recent Washington Times opinion piece, Dr. Pat Michaels again triDr. Pat Michaelses to confuse the science of climate change and create the perception that there are a significant number of climate change scientists who disagree that global warming is happening and is caused by humans. I am not a scientist, but I do know that in science, much like any other profession, it helps to know the background of the information source.

In the case of Dr. Pat Michaelโ€™s, it would be dubious at best to consider him an objective source on the science behind the issue of climate change when you consider the following:

1. Michaelโ€™s has received over $115,000 from oil and coal interests and funding from the Western Fuels Association for his work on climate change.

2. Michaels is a senior fellow with the Cato Institute and a resident expert at the George C. Marshall Institute, both right-wing think tanks that have received millions from oil money-backed foundations and thousands from ExxonMobil

3. Michaelโ€™s has teamed up in the past with another self professed climate change skeptic, Dr. S Fred Singer, to delay action on reducing CFCโ€™s and the hole in the o-zone layer. Singer has also admitted to receiving money from oil companies for work on global climate change.

If this is not enough to get you questioning the motivations of Pat Michaels, ask yourself why he spends more time editorializing science instead of actually practicing it.

Sincerely,

Jim Hoggan
DeSmogBlog.com
Vancouver, BC, Canada
(604) 742-4256

Related Posts

on

The worldโ€™s largest outdoor advertising company warned city councillors of โ€œfar-reaching consequencesโ€ hours before the landmark vote.

The worldโ€™s largest outdoor advertising company warned city councillors of โ€œfar-reaching consequencesโ€ hours before the landmark vote.
on

For decades, ExxonMobil argued consumers, not oil giants, should take responsibility for fossil fuel pollution. Itโ€™s now backing Carbon Measuresโ€™ accounting scheme, which moves pollution โ€œliabilitiesโ€ to buyersโ€™ books.

For decades, ExxonMobil argued consumers, not oil giants, should take responsibility for fossil fuel pollution. Itโ€™s now backing Carbon Measuresโ€™ accounting scheme, which moves pollution โ€œliabilitiesโ€ to buyersโ€™ books.
Analysis
on

For some separatists, ignoring Indigenous rights is not only a side effect of an independent Alberta, but an explicit goal.

For some separatists, ignoring Indigenous rights is not only a side effect of an independent Alberta, but an explicit goal.
Opinion
on

Democratic innovation as a pathway for revitalising global climate action.

Democratic innovation as a pathway for revitalising global climate action.