Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
At least it is fairly humorous and innocent compared to the disastrous exploding children clip. Good for them, but, well, a bit cutesy.

You probably know my shtick - the dominant PR change shouldn't be coming from more glitz and "Climate Scientists Got Talent" props, but from climate scientists (real ones) who first point at increasing weather disasters, blame climate change for them and who are then shown to be unfounded or, at minimum, untrustworthy by the very science numbers. There is really no easier target to shoot down and influence public confidence than showing that scientists are either lying or stupid.

Unfortunately, over 1.5 years after the release of CRU emails, which, considering the bad rep climate scientists got from the whole affair, should have been a clarion call but somehow wasn't, as respected scientists still do it and are still being shown to be off-base by independent analysis.

The converted won't be swayed, but they hardly matter.

Now, it also has been recently argued that real communication from what climate scientists know hasn't been properly brought to the public, except for bits of child-speak (and now rap). Personally I'm interested to see if there is sufficient traction to explain to the public, as independently as possible, what is going on in actual scientific terms (to a certain degree). Although I fear that anyone who even genuinely tries will get pigeonholed as fast as can be as a "hysteric alarmist" or a "denier" and the wheel grinds on.

by Nomad (Bjinse) on Thu May 12th, 2011 at 04:52:48 AM EST

Others have rated this comment as follows:


Occasional Series