Friday, June 15, 2012

5227.txt

cc: Asher Minns <A.MinnsatXYZxyz.ac.uk>, John Shepherd <j.g.shepherdatXYZxyz.soton.ac.uk>, David Cromwell <ddcatXYZxyz.soton.ac.uk>, Peter Challenor <P.ChallenoratXYZxyz.soton.ac.uk>, gschmidt@giss.nasa.gov, h.j.schellnhuber@uea.ac.uk, "B.E. Launder" <mcjtsbl@fs4.umist.ac.uk>, Mike Hulme <m.hulmeatXYZxyz.ac.uk>, Katy Hill <klh@soc.soton.ac.uk>, "Quinn, Rachel" <Rachel.QuinnatXYZxyzalsoc.ac.uk>, Laura Middleton <Laura.MiddletonatXYZxyz.ac.uk>
date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 15:57:10 +0100
from: Stefan Rahmstorf <rahmstorfatXYZxyz-potsdam.de>
subject: Re: to engage or not
to: "Griggs, Dave" <dave.griggsatXYZxyzoffice.com>

Dear Dave,
your comment about "skeptics" is of course correct - being skeptical is a scientific
virtue, maybe even the essence of science.
What we are really talking about is not skeptics, but deniers - people who are deliberately
trying to mislead the public about global warming with pseudo-scientific arguments.
Unfortunately the term "climate skeptics" is already established for these people.
Attached is a nice cartoon from the Washington Post this week.
Stefan
--
Stefan Rahmstorf
Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK)
For contact details, reprints, movies & general infos see:
[1]http://www.pik-potsdam.de/~stefan

Embedded Content: WashPostCartoon.gif: 00000001,02ef452f,00000000,00000000

No comments:

Post a Comment