Difference between revisions of "Globalisation:Global Warming Policy Foundation: Criticisms"
Jenna Leslie (talk | contribs) |
Jenna Leslie (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
David Aaronovitch, a British journalist, wrote in The Times on 24 November that “Lord Lawson’s acceptance of the science turns out, on close scrutiny, to be considerably less than half-hearted. Thus he speaks of “the (present) majority scientific view”. He goes on to say that “people like Lord Lawson” are not sceptical about climate change and are only sceptical about “what they don’t want to be true”.<ref>The Times "[http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/david_aaronovitch/article6928868.ece Strip Away the Figleaf and Reveal Naysayers]" accessed 10.11.10</ref> David Aaronvitch is claiming that Lord Lawson and his colleagues are claiming that there is no issue with climate change as this is what they would like to believe. | David Aaronovitch, a British journalist, wrote in The Times on 24 November that “Lord Lawson’s acceptance of the science turns out, on close scrutiny, to be considerably less than half-hearted. Thus he speaks of “the (present) majority scientific view”. He goes on to say that “people like Lord Lawson” are not sceptical about climate change and are only sceptical about “what they don’t want to be true”.<ref>The Times "[http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/david_aaronovitch/article6928868.ece Strip Away the Figleaf and Reveal Naysayers]" accessed 10.11.10</ref> David Aaronvitch is claiming that Lord Lawson and his colleagues are claiming that there is no issue with climate change as this is what they would like to believe. | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | Another question which has risen about the Global Warming Policy Foundation is the fact that they refuse to reveal the identity of donors that fund it. This raises doubts about the charity’s agenda. Statements such as "we do not accept gifts from anyone with a significant interest in an energy company" will always lead to suspicion when operating in such a distrustful environment. It is not fully understood why the GWPF do not just nip the suspicions in the bud and reveal the identity of the donors or reveal the identity of the donors who for their names to be given?<ref>The Guardian "[http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/mar/09/global-warming-policy-foundation-job-advert Wanted: GWPF assistant director to reveal thinktank's funding]" accessed 10.11.10</ref> | ||
Revision as of 20:21, 11 November 2010
The Global Warming Policy Foundation has received much support in the past year, however it has also received much criticism.
David Aaronovitch, a British journalist, wrote in The Times on 24 November that “Lord Lawson’s acceptance of the science turns out, on close scrutiny, to be considerably less than half-hearted. Thus he speaks of “the (present) majority scientific view”. He goes on to say that “people like Lord Lawson” are not sceptical about climate change and are only sceptical about “what they don’t want to be true”.[1] David Aaronvitch is claiming that Lord Lawson and his colleagues are claiming that there is no issue with climate change as this is what they would like to believe.
Another question which has risen about the Global Warming Policy Foundation is the fact that they refuse to reveal the identity of donors that fund it. This raises doubts about the charity’s agenda. Statements such as "we do not accept gifts from anyone with a significant interest in an energy company" will always lead to suspicion when operating in such a distrustful environment. It is not fully understood why the GWPF do not just nip the suspicions in the bud and reveal the identity of the donors or reveal the identity of the donors who for their names to be given?[2]
- ↑ The Times "Strip Away the Figleaf and Reveal Naysayers" accessed 10.11.10
- ↑ The Guardian "Wanted: GWPF assistant director to reveal thinktank's funding" accessed 10.11.10
