- Vetting the Paris Agreement
- Vivement le future, quand le travail sera devenu une option.
- Changement climatique : l’AAAS sort de ses gonds
- No Spring in America
- Aunty BBC or the wicked stepmother? Mind where you step!
- Et si on changeait l’école… radicalement ?
- La Crimée : une occasion en or
- Climat : au nom de la prudence…
- 10,787 hits
glupi on Climat : une connerie de … Don’t worry, Dave[c]… on Plus ça change… lilie libre on Climat : une connerie de … lilie libre on Climat : une connerie de … lilie libre on Climat : une connerie de …
Category Archives: Climate & the media
En tant que scientifiques, il ne nous appartient pas de dire aux gens ce qu’ils doivent faire ou croire au sujet de la menace croissante du changement climatique. Toutefois, nous estimons qu’il relève de notre responsabilité professionnelle de nous assurer, … Continue reading
This is the BBC’s fault, as is made perfectly clear in this excellent article by Dana Nuccitelli for The Guardian, which hits all the right nails bang on the head. …the BBC has habitually undervalued expert input from scientists and academics. In an … Continue reading
Details of AR5 (the 5th IPCC Assessment Report) are emerging in Stockholm and the signs are not good. At this stage it’s difficult to know exactly who is saying what – the scientists or the journalists. The Mail on Sunday’s … Continue reading
“Climate scientists wrangle over crucial projections” says the Guardian (here), but the sub-header is misleading, and seriously so. I would even say mischievously so if this were not the Guardian. For the scientists are not wrangling… with each other. It’s … Continue reading
Lots of stuff in today’s paper provoked by the imminent publication of IPCC n°5. The Guardian’s science editor Robin McKie reports on the content. My eye was caught by this paragraph: In addition, the new report has tackled the issue of … Continue reading
In a post hosted by the Guardian, Abraham and Nuccitelli make a good job of shredding two articles that are at best inaccurate, at worst criminally misleading. When it comes to climate science reporting, the Mail on Sunday and Telegraph are only … Continue reading
On BBC Radio 4’s Any Questions, on 7 June, one of the questions was this: Are those concerned about climate change talking anti-scientific green ideological nonsense? One of the panel members was the UK Secretary of State for the Environment, Owen Paterson, and … Continue reading
Dear Mr Dimbleby, I write to express my concern over the composition of the panel for the June 7th edition of Any Questions. The points I raise below are not mere rhetorical; I think they’re immensely important and I would … Continue reading
The Chartered Institute of Environmental Health has produced a statement that’s worth reading, dealing with an aspect of climate change that rarely makes it onto the front pages: …it would be complacent to think that diseases that are now present … Continue reading
The quote is from Maria van der Hoeven, the IEA’s executive director. The IEA (International Energy Agency), not known for its raging eco-fundamentalist tendencies, has issued its latest report on CEM (Clean Energy Ministerial – Jesus, who thinks up these names?), … Continue reading