Is This a Dream?

I've been very busy the last couple days, and I was looking forward to a long sleep when I checked my notifications before going to bed. One was to a new post by the blogger Anders titled, "Climate Skepticism." I thought it might be amusing diversion before bed to see what he had to say on skepticism. I chuckled when I read:

Addendum : Maybe I shouldn’t have written this post since it is likely to lead to one of those conspiracy-laden comment threads. I’m not really that interested in such discussions, so please try to avoid making conspiracy ideation-type comments. I’ll happily moderate or delete any that won’t lead to a constructive discussion.

Thinking it's silly how people like Anders are so quick to call people conspiracy theorists. It's one of those talking points which will never die, no matter how many times it's shown the "research" behind it is completely bogus. Properly amused and sleepy, I went to close my laptop and go to bed. Before I could though, my eye caught this ub the first response Anders got:

The problem is that there’s been a campaign to discredit climate science experts, but there’s no substance behind it. The most common example is the Climategate emails, which were entirely benign when actually taken in context, as nine separate investigations found.

This was said by Dana Nuccitelli, a person who's previously explained:

The climate disinformation campaign has been very effective on this issue. Despite the overwhelming consensus amongst climate experts that humans are causing global warming, only 53% of Americans believe humans are the primary cause, and only 58% believe that most scientists agree that global warming is even occurring.

To which I had asked how claiming there is "a concerted effort to knowingly spread lies that has caused the American population to be misinformed" is not espousing a conspiracy theory. Nuccitelli's responses included statements like:

I'm not claiming that everyone who disagrees with me is a liar, I am claming there is a disinformation campaign which certain parties are enaged in. That's not a conspiracy theory, it's a reality. Look at any number of fossil fuel-funded think tanks, for starters.

And:

Brandon, ExxonMobil admitted to doing exactly what I describe.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/may/28/climatechange.fossilfuels

I'm not really interested in trying to convince you that reality is reality. If you want to deny that there's a climate disinformation campaign, that's your choice.

Even though his source merely said:

The ExxonMobil report says: "In 2008 we will discontinue contributions to several public policy research groups whose position on climate change could divert attention from the important discussion on how the world will secure the energy required for economic growth in an environmentally responsible manner."

Which doesn't even show ExxonMobil saying the groups it funded were wrong, much less that they had been engaged in a campaign to intentionally deceive people. The idea ExxonMobil engaged in a "disinformation campaign" completely unsupported, and the idea it "admitted to" doing so is purely a figment of Nuccitelli's imagination.

Anders wrote a post specifically telling people not to post conspiracy theories. Then, with open arms, he immediately welcomes a die-hard conspiracy theorist promoting his particular conspiracy theory.

I must be dreaming, right?

3 comments

  1. ExxonMobil was a generous supporter of the Fall 2014 AGU Meetings. So maybe he has a point?
    N.B. That last sentences is sarcasm... mostly.

  2. Gary, I think Dana Nuccitelli would say ExxonMobil realized its mistake, and now is trying to be on the "good" side. I suspect he could find an excuse for anything if he needed to.

  3. "Anders wrote a post specifically telling people not to post conspiracy theories. Then, with open arms, he immediately welcomes a die-hard conspiracy theorist promoting his particular conspiracy theory."

    As you have doubtless realized, the left/right continuum breeds "good" conspiracy ideation and "bad" conspiracy ideation, "good" hate and "bad" hate, "good" billionaires and "bad" billionaires, "good" lying and "bad" lying.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *