Canadian journalist Donna Laframboise. Former National Post & Toronto Star columnist, past vice president of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association.
A gent named Pan Pantziarka has written a review of The Delinquent Teenager. Read it here: http://www.londonbookreview.com/lbr0061.html
He sent me a link to the review and asked if I’d participate in an e-mail interview. That interview has now been posted.
I’ve not commented on Peter Gleick‘s one-star review of my book on Amazon.com prior to this interview. (Gleick has reviewed only two books on Amazon and, fair-minded, fun-loving, charitable soul that he is, has given both of them a one-star rating.)
This, therefore, is what I have to say:
We need to have a professional, courteous, grown-up conversation about the [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change]. I think it is remarkable that this organization has been around for 22 years old, that it has won a Nobel Peace Prize, that it is so important and influential – and yet mine is the first book to take a close and critical look at it.
If others wish to follow in Gleick’s footsteps and declare that no one needs to read my book, they’re welcome to do so. But I don’t think the average person is impressed by that sort of behaviour.
In answering a question about the future of the IPCC, I remark that this “organization reached its zenith back in 2007. It will never again be that admired or powerful.”
In the context of a question about the science of climate change I declare, in all sincerity, that:
I think there are good scientists on all sides of the climate change debate. Which is why I think that everyone deserves to be heard. I certainly don’t presume to know who’s right.
But it is my answer to Question #1, regarding how I respond to the stereotyping of climate skeptics as “white, male, and conservative” that may be most interesting to some readers. Here is part of my response:
The skeptics with whom I’ve come into contact are a diverse group of people. Many of them embrace environmentally conscious lifestyles and hold what can only be considered progressive views on topics such as gay marriage and reproductive choice. But in this case they smell a rat, and they expect their concerns to be addressed. Others skeptics, however, do identify with various shades of conservative thought. And thank goodness for that – because a diversity of political analysis is as important to a healthy society as a diversity of other kinds of culture.
Reducing a broad spectrum of people to the cardboard caricature of ‘white, male, and conservative’ is a sign of lazy thinking. It’s juvenile and self-indulgent. Rather than diminishing people in that manner I work hard to see – and understand – the world in its infinite permutations.
Read the entire interview here.
Meanwhile, I continue to await word from CreateSpace (Amazon’s publishing arm) that the paperback edition of my book is ready. Yes, those are my fingertips drumming impatiently on the table…