At least Jones acknowledges that there is a “counter argument” to make.
From the Climategate 2.0 collection, Phil Jones acknowledges what we all know:
The reporting of climate stories within the media (especially the BBC) is generally one-sided, i.e. the counter argument is rarely made.
The e-mail exchange is below.
date: Thu Nov 13 16:19:22 2008
from: Phil Jones
subject: Re: [Env.faculty] Global Environmental Change Projects
to: Claire Reeves
I’ve not done this for at least a couple of years, so here’s a subject.
Have a look through and see if you would want to do it. It worked
well last time. The 3-5 papers is try to keep the students focussed
on specific papers – otherwise it could spiral out of control. Happy for
you to check with Corinne if you think necessary.
In the MSc course we have the students debating some of the hot
topics in Climate Change, and they seem to really enjoy it.
Climate Change: Is the science done and dusted?
(Phil Jones, email@example.com)
Most governments around the world have signed up to Kyoto, and it is likely
that the US will engage much more readily in many processes after Jan 20, 2009.
The UK has a climate change bill which seeks to reduce emissions by 80% by
2050, and to produce national risk assessments every 5 years. To almost all in
government circles (including the US from Jan 20, 2009), the science is done
and dusted. The reporting of climate stories within the media (especially the
BBC) is generally one-sided, i.e. the counter argument is rarely made. There is,
still a vociferous and small majority of climate change skeptics (also called deniers,
but these almost entirely exclude any climate-trained climate scientists)
who engage the public/govt/media through web sites. Mainstream climate science
does not engage with them, and most of these skeptics/deniers do not write
regular scientific papers in peer-review journals. The project would address the
division through the reporting (in mainstream media and bloggs) of a number
(to be decided but 3-5) recent scientific papers. Issues to be addressed include:
should a vociferous minority be able to bully mainstream scientists?; should
mainstream climate scientists have to change the way they have worked for
generations (through the peer-review literature)? and should the science be
conducted across blogg sites?
Phil Jones will supply a list of possible papers (to select from) and a couple
of the main web sites involved.
Finally, it’s possible I won’t be able to make the presentations. I’m
down for a meeting that week, but it hasn’t been confirmed yet. I could
persuade one or two in CRU to stand in for me then if needed.
At 10:44 13/11/2008, you wrote:
As in previous years we are looking for around 25 faculty to volunteer to mentor a
project for the Global Environmental Change course.
Page 29061 of 33101
This involves proposing a project which includes both a human/social and natural
and supervising a group of around 6 students. We expect mentors to spend six hours
with the students between end of January and end of March. The project mentors will
be asked to mark two projects and to attend, if possible, the GEC conference
for March 31st, 9am to 4pm.
May I remind you that each faculty member is asked to supervise a group project once
every three years, so if you have not done this over the last 2 years then you will be
expected to volunteer this year.
Obviously we are happy for people who been mentors in the last 2 years to volunteer
again this year.
Please can you send a title plus a 2-3 sentence description of the project by the end of
Novemeber. Last year’s projects are attached to give you an idea of the nature of the
If you proposed a project last year which was not used, please let me know if you wish
to propose the same project again.
P.S. I have taken over as the coordinator of the Group Projects for this module.
Corinne Le Quere is the convenor for the module.
Dr. Claire E. Reeves
School of Environmental Sciences
University of East Anglia
Norwich NR4 7TJ UK
Env.faculty mailing list