brought to you by www.energyboom.com
 
“An imperative read for a successful future.”
~LEONARDO DICAPRIO  
 
Clearing the PR Pollution that Clouds Climate Science

Desmog Video

You need Flash player 8+ and JavaScript enabled to view this video.


 



The telling silence of Martin-Shulte and the Science and Public Policy Institute

Last week I wrote a piece about the people and organizations involved in the latest attack on the work of Dr. Naomi Oreseks. They were: Dr. Klaus-Martin Shulte, Christopher Monckton and Rob Ferguson, who was formerly employed by the oil-industry backed "think" tank, the Frontiers of Freedom. Ferguson now runs his own think tank called the "Science and Public Policy Institute."

After exhausting resources on the internet, I had a few important questions left outstanding, so I sent emails to Ferguson and Martin-Shulte almost a week ago with no response as of yet.

Here are the questions I sent Ferguson:

1. How did Lord Monckton receive a copy of Shulte's work so far in advance of it being published?
2. Is Shulte employed by the Science and Policy Institute, or has he received any financial compensation from your organization?
3. If there is no financial relationship between your organization and Shulte, how is it that your organization is privy to such things as the report in advance of its publication and Shulte's follow-up "open letters" to Dr. Oreskes?

And here are the questions I sent Shulte:

I am wondering if you could clear up the following questions that I have outstanding:

1. How did Lord Monckton receive a copy of your work so far in advance of it being published?
2. Are employed by the Science and Policy Institute, or have you received any financial compensation from the Science and Policy Institute?
3. If there is no financial relationship between you and the Science and Policy Institute, how is it that they are privy to such things as your report in advance of its publication and your follow-up "open letters" to Dr. Oreskes?

I think I'll just keep sending them these questions until they answer them, and you can too. Here's Shulte's email address that I found on the internet: Klaus-Martin.Schulte [at] kch.nhs.uk

And here's Rob Ferguson's: bferguson [at] sppinstitute.org

 

 

What's next?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
#118700
Steve L. +0; Tue, 2007-09-11 15:53; typo in one of your letters
Steve L (not verified)

You have a typo:

"2. Are employed by the Science and Policy Institute, or have you received any financial compensation from the Science and Policy Institute?" --> Are who?

I think your email is a good idea.

#119354
Sean O. +0; Thu, 2007-09-13 12:10; Foolish
Sean O (not verified)

I commented on this on my blog "Is It Getting Warmer?" as well. I am amazed that this level of discussion has been realized regarding two essays that were never critically reviewed. In addition, the methodology of both researchers must be seriously doubted. You can read the rest of my thoughts at http://globalwarming-factorfiction.com/2007/09/11/consensus-discussion-liars-or-statistics/

#163422
ZZMike. +0; Mon, 2008-01-21 10:01; SPPI
ZZMike (not verified)

I'd also like to ask how Dr Oreskes got her search terms so badly wrong, and why she wasn't able to re-do the research and replace the first result.

Scientific Consensus

#163424
ZZMike. +0; Mon, 2008-01-21 10:02; SCCI
ZZMike (not verified)

Sorry about that last URL. (Not paying attention)

http://www.staff.livjm.ac.uk/spsbpeis/Scienceletter.htm

About the climate cover-up

About the climate cover-up

Democracy is utterly dependent upon an electorate that is accurately informed. In promoting climate change denial (and often denying their responsibility for doing so) industry has done more than endanger the environment. It has undermined democracy.

There is a vast difference between putting forth a point of view, honestly held, and intentionally sowing the seeds of confusion. Free speech does not include the right to deceive. Deception is not a point of view. And the right to disagree does not include a right to intentionally subvert the public awareness.

Although all public relations professionals are bound by a duty to not knowingly mislead the public, some have executed comprehensive campaigns of misinformation on behalf of industry clients on issues ranging from tobacco and asbestos to seat belts.

Lately, these fringe players have turned their efforts to creating confusion about climate change. This PR campaign could not be accomplished without the compliance of media as well as the assent and participation of leaders in government and business.

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER

Like what you read here? Get our top five stories in your inbox every week. » here's a preview
Enter your email and subscribe now!



DeSmog Tip Jar

DeSmog Tip Jar

Flickr Photos

Flickr Photos
Hoggan, Robertson, HarcourtJames Hoggan - Black and WhiteJames Hoggan - ColourClimate Cover-Up Book Cover

Member of the Progressive Bloggers Network

MEMBER OF THE PROGRESSIVE BLOGGERS NETWORK

Progressive Bloggers