Log in | Jump |

CEJournal

News & Perspective from the Center for Environmental Journalism
This item was posted on November 28, 2009, and it was categorized as CRU email controversy, Climate Change, Global Warming, Global warming skeptics.
You can follow comments through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and trackbacks are closed.

Ben Hale, my colleague here at the University of Colorado, has written an excellent analysis of the CRU email controversy, focusing on Michael Mann’s recent response posted at Climateprogress.

Ben is an environmental philosopher, and is co-editor with Andrew Light of the journal Ethics, Place & Environment. His logic and clarity is in stark contrast to the thrashing and histrionics that have characterized much of the controversy —  including an anti-semitic jab at me, and a call for journalists and climate scientists to be put before firing squads. (Both appeared in comments on one of my posts; I removed the one calling for violence but left the anti-semitic comment for people to judge for themselves.)

If you still have an open mind about the email controversy and feel, like I do, that I do not know enough yet to reach firm conclusions, I urge you to read Michael Mann’s comments, as well as Ben’s excellent analysis.

Share
This item was posted by .


You can follow comments through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and trackbacks are closed.

One Comment

  1. Posted November 29, 2009 at 11:37 am | Permalink

    Tom:

    I’ve read Ben’s analysis and find he’s a bit more skeptical of Mann’s motives than I am.

    Mann has made ‘mistakes’ with some of his hockey stick reconstructions, and is unduly sensitive to criticism. But, except for Phil Jones’ call for wholesale deletions of AR-4 related emails, I see only typical dumb human behavior in the rest of the hacked emails and just some more evidence of the well-known remaining imperfections in the peer-review process.

One Trackback

  1. Posted December 1, 2009 at 9:56 am | Permalink

    [...] December 1, 2009 by Richard “Manning up” — excellent analysis by Ben Hale [...]

Comments are currently closed