OJBs Web Site: Blog Page

Note: You are currently viewing my old web site. There is a new version with most of this content at OJB.NZ.
The new site is being updated, uses modern techniques, has higher quality media, and has a mobile-friendly version.
This old site will stay on-line for a while, but maybe not indefinitely. Please update your bookmarks. Thanks.

Add a Comment (Go Up to OJB's Blog Page)

Dirty Tactics

Entry 329, on 2006-05-17 at 12:48:38 (Rating 3, News)

Recently an organisation has been set up to ostensibly push the truth about global warming. That "truth" is that any climate change which might exist isn't necessarily the result of human activity, and that there is no good reason to institute any significant process to reduce emissions of greenhouse gas, etc. They are almost certainly wrong, of course. While there is still some debate about climate change, every year it is becoming increasingly accepted by science.

They use the name "New Zealand Climate Science Coalition", which is somewhat disingenuous in itself because science involves the impartial consideration of all the evidence, not picking and choosing which evidence suits a position already held by the organisation. I don't think the coalition is really interested in science. Some of the people involved are real scientists, but I suspect their information is out of date - there are several "past professors" and "former researchers" there.

So these people seem to be publishing misleading information on their web site and suggesting anthropogenic climate change isn't a well accepted theory and that there is no good reason to take serious action to prevent it. The reason this has become an issue is that Greenpeace has sabotaged their efforts somewhat by taking similar domain names and presenting an opposing view.

This is dirty tactics by Greenpeace to some extent, but publishing biased and misleading information is also dirty so maybe Greenpeace's response is justified. If the "Science Coalition" are so confident of their facts they surely don't mind alternative views being considered as well. After all, this is science and any theory needs to stand up to scrutiny. I readily accept that Greenpeace have a similar biased position but from the opposite perspective. Ultimately neither site is probably the best place for an unbiased view.

The global resistance to climate change is quite considerable. Presumably this is because big business doesn't want to have to consider environmental principles in its pursuit of maximum profit. Destroying the planet's environmental balance is a small price to pay for a few extra dollars in profit after all.

There are no comments for this entry.

You can leave comments about this entry using this form.

To add a comment: enter a name and email (both optional), type the number shown above, enter a comment, then click Add.
Note that you can leave the name blank if you want to remain anonymous.
Enter your email address to receive notifications of replies and updates to this entry.
The comment should appear immediately because the authorisation system is currently inactive.