So, bottom line is: it’s OK to exaggerate as long as it’s for a good cause. Much like what Steven Schneider said here:
“..Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest…”
Or Gavin Schmidt said here:
You see the problem with ‘scientization’ of the debate as Gavin puts it, is that the science, and Gaia, and the weather, is totally stacked up against the AGW-fraud-gravy-train. It’s an embarssment to still support this AGW clima-geddon rubbish.
Emma Thompson’s interview on newsnight has caused a bit of a Twitter storm because she got some things wrong. For example she said
if they take out of the earth all the oil they want to take out, you look at the science – our temperature will rise 4 degrees Celsius by 2030, and that’s not sustainable.
Well, this is clearly wrong. Our temperatures will almost certainly not rise by 4 degrees Celsius by 2030, but she did at least get right that how much we burn will determine how much we warm.
She also made strong claims about refugee crisis
Our refugee crisis – which, let me tell you, if we allow climate change to go on as it’s going, the refugee crisis we have at the moment will look like a tea party, compared to what’s going to happen in a few years’ time. Because if…
View original post 478 more words