Jim – Just to clarify what others have said, I think that most people who read 
your website will interpret the words “Some of…” to mean a meaningful 
percentage, rather than “There exists one…”  So you might call that public 
record, but unless you expect your readers to all understand the broader 
perspective, it is quite deliberately misleading on your part, and you 
shouldn’t pretend otherwise.

 

(I also have an issue with the fact that I don’t think there’s more than one or 
two “avid promoters” of anything but research, insofar as we don’t actually 
know what the consequences of solar geoengineering would be, so it is clearly 
premature either to criticize it or to laud it.)

 

I think we all welcome alternative opinions as long as they are based in fact 
rather than deliberate fear-mongering.

 

doug

 

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] 
On Behalf Of Jim Thomas
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2015 1:07 AM
To: Ken Caldeira
Cc: geoengineering
Subject: Re: [geo] Web site launch: GeoengineeringMonitor.org

 

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 
<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 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.







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 
<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]

+1 514 2739994 <tel:%2B1%20514%202739994> 

 

 





 

-- 
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.

Reply via email to