Post looking at Carter's "science".

• DenialGate - Highlighting Bob Carter's Selective Science

"immoral means"? Debatable whether it's immoral considering it's for the better good. Maybe "unethical" is less condemning?

John, consequentialism is invalid as a theory of ethics, so "immoral" is an accurate description.  Never-the-less, "unethical" has a less negative feel to it, and should be used for that reason.  

How about "lamentable"?

Actually unethical was the word I was going for - had a brain freeze.  Lamentable is true, but I think unethical is more apt.

Nice to see McLean's stupid prediction again. Nothing like rubbing salt into the wound - or baking soda. 

"Unethical" places us in judgment over Gleick.

"Lamentable" separates us from Gleick, but leaves open the interpretation that his heart was in the right place.

Well, personally I don't mind judging Gleick (pretty clearly unethical to impersonate someone to trick them into sending you private files), but I wouldn't object to changing to lamentable either.

Dana,

The first sentnce of the last paragraph reads:

Like the NIPCC report, Carter takes a very selective view of the climate science literature, and is himself no climate science expert. 

Recommended rewrite:

Carter cherry-picks the vast body of climate science literature and has no expertise to make objective independent assessments.

dana,

Possibly the only one who may notice the difference is Gleick.

Great post dana – but I’m biased – exposing Carter gets my approval every time. 

You may even drop the adjective altogether.