The origin of the accusation is critical, and begs for investigation because it is what put the accusation into existence in the first place. But the accusation would have died of neglect if it hadn’t gotten major media traction, and resulting additional interest and promotion from that. Where that particular media traction began is the epicenter, and the manner in which it came about, combined with the people surrounding it, is equally if not more worthy of deep investigation.
Among the four elements making up what I call the ‘smear of skeptic climate scientists’ – namely, the ‘industry-corrupted skeptic climate scientists’ accusation, the ‘core evidence’ for the accusation, the epicenter of the smear, and Ross Gelbspan – the topic of today’s post is the easiest to explain. Continue reading
I have a “Who is Gelbspan” page right here at this blog which links straight to his own bio page; other people and organizations offer roughly similar bio/history pages. However, such things (including my own version) tell you who he is, but they don’t exactly tell you what he is. Read on, and I’ll expand on why this problem needs to be resolved. Continue reading
Since more readers are arriving at this blog, I thought it would be a good idea to create a new “Background” post category, so that those who are basically unfamiliar with the 20 year+ smear of skeptic climate scientists can easily read a set of elemental details explaining what I mean when I refer to the ‘industry-corrupted skeptic climate scientists’ accusation, the ‘core evidence’ for the accusation, the epicenter of the smear, and Ross Gelbspan. First in the series is “The Accusation.” Continue reading