Jim, I do not want to get involved with the argument, but I do notice that you may wish to revise your press release. There's a quote in there from "Z", which I assume is not a real name, although I suppose it could refer to Jay Z.
Best, Ben On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 5:05 PM, Andrew Lockley <[email protected]> wrote: > Jim > > To offer a second opinion : your press release is hogwash, and your stance > is indefensible. > > Several notable fallacies exist : > 1) Claiming something is risky, whilst opposing research which will > identify and quantify risks, is nonsensical. > 2) Claiming something is risky whilst ignoring the risks of the inevitable > alternatives (committed sea level rise, committed sea ice loss, etc.) is > illogical. Bearing in mind how many times this has been pointed out to you > personally, and to ETC as an organisation, this can reasonably be assumed > to be willful. It's essentially a form of climate denial. > 3) Anyone an advocate anything. It doesn't mean they have any influence. > The press release willfully conflates the measured interest from the > scientific community (who are influential on geoengineering) with > denialists (who aren't involved in the research process). This is careless > at best and deliberately misleading at worst. You specifically describe > 'engineers' in the release - which suggests that you are in fact attacking > the research community specifically, rather than civil society or political > advocates. This amounts to an ad hominem attack. Which 'engineers' are you > referring to? Me? Stephen Salter? I'm not actually chartered, so I'll > assume it's Stephen. > 4) Your new website is (judging by the press release) willfully and > utterly one-sided. It makes no attempt to have a balanced consideration of > the ideas and risks. It is difficult to see how this will be anything other > than polemic. Bearing in mind ETC's previous failure to respond logically > to arguments levelled against its stance (see particularly 2 above), this > one-sided repetition of bunk essentially constitutes intellectual > dishonesty. It's no more noble than flat Earth advocacy. (NB I am perfectly > entitled to criticise organisations in this manner, under group rules). > 5) Your attempt to hide behind an ad hominem defence is risible. Do you > seriously expect people not to attribute your hostile press release, posted > by you, from an organisation in which you are senior, without any attempt > to distance yourself from its views, as anything other than largely your > personal stance? Either you are a hollow shill for ETC, or this is > substantially your own view. Assuming the above, it is you who has made an > implicit personal attack on the members of the geoengineering research > community. > > This press release continues a long pattern of dishonest and illegitimate > conduct from ETC. Ken (and previously Andy) are entirely right to call this > out. > > You should amend your organisation's stance and website, and withdraw your > offensive and misleading press release. > > A > On 10 Feb 2015 06:07, "Jim Thomas" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> 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]> >> [email protected] >> <http://kencaldeira.com>http://kencaldeira.com >> <https://twitter.com/KenCaldeira>https://twitter.com/KenCaldeira >> >> My assistant is Dawn Ross < <[email protected]> >> [email protected]>, with access to incoming emails. >> >> >> >> On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 7:10 PM, jim thomas < <[email protected]> >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> February 9, 2015 - ETC Group >>> <http://cts.vresp.com/c/?ETCGroup/8299c5f988/e6bca124e9/a32da62333/utm_content=jim%40etcgroup.org&utm_source=VerticalResponse&utm_medium=Email&utm_term=ETC%20Group&utm_campaign=Web%20site%20launch%3A%20GeoengineeringMonitor%2Eorg> >>> >>> >>> Read this on the ETC web site here >>> <http://cts.vresp.com/c/?ETCGroup/8299c5f988/e6bca124e9/688582e80f/utm_content=jim%40etcgroup.org&utm_source=VerticalResponse&utm_medium=Email&utm_term=on%20the%20ETC%20web%20site%20here&utm_campaign=Web%20site%20launch%3A%20GeoengineeringMonitor%2Eorg>, >>> or spread the word by retweeting >>> <http://cts.vresp.com/c/?ETCGroup/8299c5f988/e6bca124e9/f842e42d01>. >>> >>> >>> Introducing <http://GeoengineeringMonitor.org/> >>> 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 >>> <http://cts.vresp.com/c/?ETCGroup/8299c5f988/e6bca124e9/98f57290e2>,” >>> to provide a space for critical perspectives, building resistance and >>> tracking developments. >>> >>> >>> <http://cts.vresp.com/c/?ETCGroup/8299c5f988/e6bca124e9/09cc369d54> >>> 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. >>> <http://cts.vresp.com/c/?ETCGroup/8299c5f988/e6bca124e9/be1b19487f> >>> 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://cts.vresp.com/c/?ETCGroup/8299c5f988/e6bca124e9/ea638405ed> >>> http://www.geoengineeringmonitor.org. The site features updates via >>> Twitter >>> <http://cts.vresp.com/c/?ETCGroup/8299c5f988/e6bca124e9/873f872972> >>> (@geoengmon) >>> and Facebook >>> <http://cts.vresp.com/c/?ETCGroup/8299c5f988/e6bca124e9/29ebf47afd> as >>> well. >>> >>> >>> -30- >>> >>> Jim Thomas >>> ETC Group (Montreal) >>> <[email protected]>[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]> >>> [email protected]. >>> To post to this group, send email to <[email protected]> >>> [email protected]. >>> Visit this group at <http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering> >>> http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. >>> For more options, visit <https://groups.google.com/d/optout> >>> 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. >> > -- > 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.
