Exec. Publisher of Science journal responds to Palin op-ed in Washington Post

Fri, 2009-12-11 02:25Brendan DeMelle
Brendan DeMelle's picture

Exec. Publisher of Science journal responds to Palin op-ed in Washington Post

Alan Leshner, the CEO of the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the executive publisher of the journal Science, responded to Sarah Palin’s op-ed in the Washington Post, calling her out for her denial of climate science and her lack of basic understanding of the difference between climate vs. weather. 

In his own op-ed, titled “Don’t Let the Climate Doubters Fool You,” Leshner says that Palin “distorted the clear scientific evidence” of climate change and “she also badly confused the concepts of daily weather changes and long-term climate trends.”

Palin’s attempt to use the “Climategate” email theft scandal to promote the cause of climate denialism is thoroughly refuted by Leshner, who summarizes clearly the vast scientific evidence of human-driven climate change.  Read Leshner’s op-ed in the Washington Post, it speaks for itself.

Comments

Surprisingly sarah Palin’s op ed piece was extremely well written, with salient facts and an underlying philisophical message that makes for a great read. I had written her off but she is slowly transforming her public image into one being more presidential in nature.

Tactically this is a smart move as she has positioned herself as a leader on a side where the public is demanding political leadership. For Sarah Palin Climategate could be a game changer.

In regards to the rebuttal article quoted here, Christmas has come early for Mrs. Palin. Science has become political and is no longer objective. What better way to hammer home Palins point when a science Journalist, not a politician is responding to Palin’s article. Science is politics and Leshner proved that beyond any doubt by his rebuttal.

Score one for Sarah Palin.

It may have been “well written,” but it certainly did not have “salient facts.” It is impossible to understand how she can summarily dismiss the volumes of peer-reviewed scientific research conducted over the last two decades simply because of a few private email messages. Palin is a politician, pure and simple, and she cannot simulataneously claim she favors sound science and then dismiss what is already known and agreed upon by the vast majority of climate scientists.

is a scientist with an outstanding career both in research science and policy, not a “science Journalist.”

Hint: Try “a Google” before mouthing off.

Palin no more wrote this piece than I did. She has yet to deliver an extemporaneous speech that even comes close to the syntax or rhythm shown in this editorial. This was prepared for her by her handlers in order to try and establish some credibility for the pretty face being paraded around by a bunch of industry and party hacks as a viable political candidate. She parrots what she’s told without understanding a word of what she says. In this editorial she doesn’t have to even do that. All she has to do is allow her name to be used on the byline.
My two year old daughter is more presidential than S.P.

It is so amazing that you True Believers have such wonderful psychic powers and can see all and be everywhere at once. Must be nice to be a god.

Palin’s stock is on the rise only among the wingnut far-right. Among Independents and Democrats, she remains very unpopular and will not win in 2012 (if that is what you are hinting at).

Her book sales are through the roof(far ahead of Obama’s book sales before he became President). Her appearances are packed to the rafters, any TV appearance she puts in and ratings go sky high.

If She writes anything on her facebook page and it becomes a news item and gets the political blogs all heated up.

Must be a lot of “far right wingnuts” out there.

She has a cult following but she also has a certain presence to keep it going. Interestingly Obama got in not because of accomplishments or intelligence or a specific message, but basically because people were tired of war and tired of W and a lot of people got very excited about a first black president. The only thing he had to do was read well and throw around the word “change”

Your racist assumptions about Obama are disgusting; and the fact is he is a lot smarter than Palin.

… no not Bill Clinton

there’s nothing racist about saying Obama got elected because of being black. It’s all anybody talked about during the election. The historic nature of the first black president. If the man was white , he would be completely unnoticed.

Sure he’s smart. Smart enough to be a law professor, but as a politician, he’s very ordinary.

He’s black. That’s what it’s about.

NEED TO KNOW HAVE TO GOO. cosmetic dentistrygroup 

[x]

At a June 19 speaking event at London's Chatham House, North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) secretary-general Anders Fogh Rasmussen claimed the Russian government is covertly working to discredit hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) in the west from afar.

“I have met allies who can report that Russia, as part of their sophisticated information and disinformation operations,...

read more