{"id":8764,"date":"2019-07-11T13:20:28","date_gmt":"2019-07-11T20:20:28","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/gelbspanfiles.com\/?p=8764"},"modified":"2024-03-22T11:36:32","modified_gmt":"2024-03-22T18:36:32","slug":"no-matter-where-you-go-there-he-is","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/gelbspanfiles.com\/?p=8764","title":{"rendered":"No matter where you go, there he is"},"content":{"rendered":"

He, being Ross Gelbspan, with regard to any prominent person regurgitating the accusation about skeptic climate scientists being paid by the fossil fuel industry to spread lies undercutting the so-called ‘settled science’ of human-induced global warming. In this case, I already covered a particular journalistic due diligence problem within Nathanial Rich’s promotion of his epic New York Times<\/em> story “Losing Earth” in my August 9, 2018 blog post<\/a>. Rich’s blunder there was to repeat a hugely troubling talking point from Naomi Oreskes, a person who’s plagued with a variety of credibility problems as it pertains to her alleged entry<\/a> into the topic of ‘industry-corrupted skeptics’ and the stories she tells surrounding that situation<\/a>.<\/p>\n

I figured that would be the end of it regarding Nathanial Rich. I should know better about such things by now; Oreskes is never the end of the line in these kinds of situations.<\/p>\n

Nathanial Rich wasn’t content to simply leave his opinions at just a newspaper publication, he turned it into a book<\/a>. Similar to many other book authors, he named who his information sources were. And, like so many other prominent enviro-activists regurgitating talking points about ‘industry-paid\/orchestrated disinformation campaigns’, he couldn’t resist mentioning the “Information Council on<\/strong><\/em> [sic; incorrect word<\/a>] the Environment<\/em>” (ICE), the supposedly sinister public relations campaign<\/a> that swayed national public opinion in an extraordinarily successful way<\/a>, so much so that Al Gore claimed<\/a> ExxonMobil later adopted its strategy goal. Deep examination of the real situation reveals the ICE campaign was actually so small that few ever saw it<\/a>, its alleged strategy goal to “reposition global warming as theory rather than fact<\/em>” was no more than an outside proposal which was never even seen by the top ICE administrator, and his assistant rejected the proposal<\/a> because he had no idea how it could be implemented.<\/p>\n

Adding further insult to his own injury in connection with his mention of the ICE campaign<\/a>, Nathanial Rich also couldn’t resist spitting up the unsupportable talking point implication about needless fair media balance given to the skeptic side of the issue \u2026 a talking point made famous by guess who<\/a>?<\/p>\n

Just from that, loyal readers here can likely guess where I’m headed next: Nathanial Rich’s sources.<\/p>\n

From the “Losing Earth” book’s page 206,<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

I drew from the anthropologist Myanna Lahsen<\/strong>\u2019s outstanding research on the history of climate denialism \u2026; \u2026 Climate Files<\/strong> \u2026 interviews conducted by the American Institute of Physics<\/strong>. The following books deeply informed my discussion of industry’s involvement in climate politics: Censoring Science by Mark Bowen<\/strong>; The Discovery of Global Warming by Spencer R. Weart<\/strong>; Merchants of Doubt by Naomi Oreskes<\/strong> and Erik M. Conway; The Heat Is On by Ross Gelbspan<\/span>; Climate Cover-Up by James Hoggan<\/strong> with Richard Littlemore; and Stephen Schneider<\/strong>\u2019s Science as a Contact Sport.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Right. The wipeouts here are best illustrated by screencapture photo links.<\/p>\n