The Art and Motivation of Editorializing Science

authordefault
onJul 11, 2006 @ 12:35 PDT

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

authordefault
Admin's short bio, lorem ipsum dolor sit amet consectetur adipisicing elit. Voluptate maxime officiis sed aliquam! Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet consectetur adipisicing elit.

Related Posts

onNov 14, 2025 @ 07:04 PST

Their access to the summit is proof that Big Oil still holds "a dangerous sway" over the climate process, campaigners say.

Their access to the summit is proof that Big Oil still holds "a dangerous sway" over the climate process, campaigners say.
onNov 13, 2025 @ 21:01 PST

Delegationโ€™s composition consistent with new KBPO report revealingย this yearโ€™s U.N. climate talks have the largest number of fossil fuel lobbyists to date.

Delegationโ€™s composition consistent with new KBPO report revealingย this yearโ€™s U.N. climate talks have the largest number of fossil fuel lobbyists to date.
onNov 13, 2025 @ 06:22 PST

Labour government accused of being โ€œcomplicit in the fossil fuel industryโ€™s conquest of the COP processโ€.

Labour government accused of being โ€œcomplicit in the fossil fuel industryโ€™s conquest of the COP processโ€.
Analysis
onNov 12, 2025 @ 12:15 PST

Our changing climate will produce winners and losers. Canada should look to the Global South for a winning strategy.

Our changing climate will produce winners and losers. Canada should look to the Global South for a winning strategy.