Yesterday, I posted a weblog with respect to an interview of Steve Schneider of Stanford University by Tom Fuller of Examiner.com (see). Mr Fuller replied last evening and his reply is posted below.
Update: Roger Pielke Sr., principal contributor to Climate Science, has commented both here and on his website regarding my classification of his weblog as a ‘skeptic’ weblog. I plead guilty to over-facile classification. Although Climate Science does regularly challenge the accepted wisdom of climate change activists, he is first and foremost a scientist who publishes regularly in peer-reviewed journals. As I have noted before here, one of the major themes pursued on Climate Science is that humans do influence the climate through deforestation, land-use policy and interruptions of the hydrologic cycle, and Pielke Sr. thinks that this may actually outweigh the effects of human emissions of CO2.
Mr. Pielke feels that being characterised as a skeptic is pejorative–and it is certainly used that way in many discussions. I guess I’ve developed a tough skin after being called much worse–to me it’s the use of the term denier that sets me off. But it’s essentially lazy writing, and I apologise. I actually have the highest respect for what I’ve seen of his work on his website and elsewhere.
I’ll be pursuing this further–sadly, Mr. Pielke didn’t provide an email address and the comments section of his blog are usually turned off. I will try and contact him but in the meantime, I apologise for any confusion.
Mr. Fuller also added in an e-mail to me (presented here with his permission),
“Dear Professor Pielke,
After reading your post (for the 4th time) on Climate Science, I wanted to talk briefly about my approach to the series of interviews I am conducting.
As a commentator (not a reporter), I am trying very hard to keep my opinion out of the discussions I have with my respondents. I do have strong views on the issue, but am trying to get a view of what people feel is the state of play at this point in time. If you do have the chance to look at some of my opinion pieces, you’ll see that I do try and balance the differing sides. For example, http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-9111-SF-Environmental-Policy-Examiner~y2009m5d15-Global-warming-in-perspective-todays-Google-news-results
My hope is that when the series is complete, people will be able to go through the list and find their own balance by comparing the differing views. I will also be providing my perspective later.
You may also publish this email if you think it adds anything to the discussion.
I appreciate the clarification by Mr. Fuller of his plan to present a forum for the diverse perspective of views on climate science. This is long overdue from the media, and his contribution on this subject could be quite valuable and influential.
I have not heard back yet from Steve Schneider but will post his response if he sends and permits its posting.