Ken, I'm puzzled what statement you are asking me to apologize for. I'm not even quoted in the news release below nor as far as I can see does it accuse you or anyone else of being 'shills for the fossil fuel industry.' - that's a label of your own invention.
Rachel Smolker of Biofuelwatch is quoted as saying "Some of the most avid promoters of geoengineering have links to the fossil fuel industries " which is a matter of record. This email list is supposed to maintain a 'no ad hominem attacks' policy. Accusing me by name of something I did not say, labeling me and my 'ilk' (meaning what?) as 'advocates for ignorance' and then demanding i issue an apology for the thing I didn't say.. That doesn't appear very measured. Now can we get back to the issues? Best Jim On Feb 9, 2015, at 11:49 PM, Ken Caldeira <[email protected]> wrote: > It is obvious from discussions on this group that most advocates of > geoengineering research are strong advocates of deep and rapid cuts in > greenhouse gas emissions. > > The suggestion from Jim Thomas and his cronies that advocates of this > research are shills for the fossil fuel industry is pure and unadulterated > hogwash. > > Most advocates of this research are deeply concerned that we are not reducing > fossil fuel emissions rapidly enough, fear the potential suffering and > hardship that these emissions may engender, and feel desperate enough to > think that it is time to think seriously about what we would do if our > greenhouse gas emissions cause truly catastrophic outcomes. > > Recognizing the need for geoengineering research means recognizing that our > fossil fuel industry may cause a climate catastrophe. This is not the > position of the fossil fuel industry. > > Some people prefer knowledge. Others prefer to remain in ignorance. Jim > Thomas and his ilk are apparently advocates for ignorance. > > I am not convinced that maintaining a state of ignorance is really the best > way to reduce environmental risk. > > Jim Thomas owes an apology to the environmental scientists like myself who > are working hard to increase understanding of ways that might be able to > reduce environmental risk should our greenhouse gas emissions cause a real > climate catastrophe. > > > > _______________ > Ken Caldeira > > Carnegie Institution for Science > Dept of Global Ecology > 260 Panama Street, Stanford, CA 94305 USA > +1 650 704 7212 [email protected] > http://kencaldeira.com > https://twitter.com/KenCaldeira > > My assistant is Dawn Ross <[email protected]>, with access to > incoming emails. > > > > On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 7:10 PM, jim thomas <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > February 9, 2015 - ETC Group >> > Read this on the ETC web site here, or spread the word by retweeting. >> > >> > Introducing GeoengineeringMonitor.org >> > Critical information and resistance to geoengineering >> > FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE >> > >> > OTTAWA, Feb 9 2015 — As the climate crisis deepens and political and economic > leaders remain in a state of paralysis, geoengineering is increasingly being > advanced as a potentially “necessary” action; if recent attempts at > opinionmaking are to be believed, it has gone from unthinkable to fundable. > And yet, public opinion and much of the scientific community considers > geoengineering technologies to be risky and more likely to aggravate than > resolve the climate crisis. >> > >> > As the National Academy of Sciences releases two new reports that support > funding geoengineering pilot projects, an alliance of civil society groups is > launching a new website, “Geoengineering Monitor,” to provide a space for > critical perspectives, building resistance and tracking developments. >> > >> > GeoengineeringMonitor.org provides an overview of criticisms of climate > engineering proposals, an historical record of opposition to geoengineering > projects, as well as timely updates and realistic evaluations of the latest > schemes. >> > >> > "Geoengineering proponents are taking to the airwaves and the op/ed pages to > sell their proposals," said Pat Mooney. "What is most troubling is that these > engineers believe they know enough to take control of global atmospheric > dynamics. Earth systems are complex and poorly understood; there is no way > they can simply make changes and achieve a single, predictable outcome.” >> > >> > “Proponents of geoengineering appear eager to play ‘god’ while experimenting > with our only planet.” >> > >> > ETC Group and Biofuelwatch, two organizations that have been critical of > geoengineering schemes, are jointly launching the new website to provide a > resource for people interested in understanding better the many risks > associated with geoengineering proposals. GeoengineeringMonitor.org documents > ecological risks, including droughts in vulnerable regions like sub-Saharan > Africa and ecological dead zones in the oceans. The site currently displays > summaries of the latest research on the projected effects of efforts to block > sunlight on Africa, Asia and Latin America, as well as analysis of the > impacts of large scale “biosequestration” proposals on land, water and > biodiversity. The site also offers perspectives into the likely strategies > of the “super major” oil conglomerates in response to the climate emergency. >> > >> > But it also critiques the thinking behind the schemes. >> > >> > "People are coming to understand that the climate crisis is escalating while > leaders do little or nothing," said Rachel Smolker of BiofuelWatch. "The > geoengineering clique is taking advantage of this situation to promote their > planetary technological manipulations. Some of the most avid promoters of > geoengineering have links to the fossil fuel industries and to institutions > that have backed climate denial." >> > >> > "The technofix mentality says that we can cure the symptom with risky > technologies instead of addressing the cause," Smolker added. "That is a very > tempting for politicians who are averse to taking bold steps and many of whom > are funded by fossil fuel industries. " >> > >> > The site provides a partial archive of media coverage of several attempts at > conducting real-world geoengineering experiments, most of which were halted > by civil society opposition. >> > >> > "Civil society has put a stop to many attempts to sneak in geoengineering > projects," said Z. "It's important to document those victories, because we're > going to need more of them as we work towards real, just climate solutions." >> > >> > GeoengineeringMonitor can be viewed at http://www.geoengineeringmonitor.org. > The site features updates viaTwitter (@geoengmon) and Facebook as well. >> > > -30- > > Jim Thomas > ETC Group (Montreal) > [email protected] > +1 514 2739994 > > > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "geoengineering" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
