>The haven't had a chance to look at the videos yet, but what ever their
>content, it would be very difficult to say for certain that Carter hadn't
>been bought out. As it is on either side of the argument. Check out Chris
>Mitchell, editor of the Oz. Recently presented some award for journalistic
>integrity and coverage of 'Climate Science', sponsored by, guess who, the
>Australian Petroleum body.
I agree it may have been prudent for Chris Mitchel to reject the award. However, provided the science and logic is correct, does it matter? All I see is that there is an award funded my the petroleum industry. In this case it just happened to be given to someone for reporting on climate.
Bob Carter usually charges for traveling and giving seminars, but to the best of my knowledge, has no interest other than presenting good science. I can't fault his data or logic. I admit I'm not a climate scientist, but can certainly evaluate data and its statistical significance. I would be interested in your (and anyone else) comments after seeing all four videos, and any problems you have with the data sources and logic applied. |