“I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous it (anthropogenic global warming) is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are.”
A licence to tell warming lies
Harvard University PhD candidate Monika Kopacz insists global warming scientists have a duty to lie:
It is no secret that a lot of climate-change research is subject to opinion, that climate models sometimes disagree even on the signs of the future changes (e.g. drier vs. wetter future climate). The problem is, only sensational exaggeration makes the kind of story that will get politicians’ — and readers’ — attention. So, yes, climate scientists might exaggerate, but in today’s world, this is the only way to assure any political action and thus more federal financing to reduce the scientific uncertainty.
We’ve heard such admissions before, of course:
Professor Stephen Schneider, global warming guru at Stanford University (said) ”we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have.”
Then there was this defence of - and allegedly by - Alarmist of the Year Tim Flannery. And this use of the warmists’ licence to exaggerate by Robyn “100 metres” Williams.