A Greenpeace activist thinks ‘the world would be a better place’ without a journalist who questions climate orthodoxy. Seventy years after the liberation of Auschwitz, he says we’d ‘solve a great deal of the world’s problems by chopping off everyone’s heads.’
Unlike most journalists, Matt Ridley has done PhD-level work in the sciences. He has served as science editor for the Economist. One would think his views on the climate debate deserve a fair hearing. Instead, he is pilloried by climate extremists.
Most polar bear info is filtered through an activist lens. Here are some alternative views.
A new report argues that alternative perspectives are vital to the scientific process. Expecting dispassion from individual researchers is probably a lost cause.
Don’t miss the Wired magazine cover story by Matt Ridley titled Apocalypse Not.
Write an essay that pokes holes in a green myth, submit it by June 30th, and you could be $13,000 US dollars richer.
Some book reviews, an excerpt in The Huffington Post, and an invitation to speak at a climate change conference in Munich.
A new 1,000-page Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report appears to ignore both nuclear power and shale gas – even though both these energy sources emit far less CO2 than does coal. This suggests the IPCC’s top priority isn’t emissions reduction after all.
David Suzuki says the planet is in “far worse shape” today than 50 years ago. But a growing library of exhaustively researched books claim the opposite.