Rick Lowe

A letter writer to The Tribune going by the pseudonym of Galileo resorts to calling The Nassau Institute names in this recent missive.

As Russell Roberts said recently:

"When you have the facts, no need to yell and insult your opponent. Just show them the facts. It's about protesting too much."

Also, we pay taxes for CARICOM to represent us at these meetings, so why do we need to go? We simply can't afford it.

It's important to mention too, that all of a sudden while The Bahamas has become very concerned about Climate Change we're installing a Bunker C power plant in Abaco. Seems hypocritical no?

Our Bahamian Galileo reminds me of the Scientists at East Anglia. Even though they "know they're right", "They're going to hide dissenting opinion and differing results".

Would the real Galileo, after all he went through, be proud of what his fellow scientists did at East Anglia? I think not.

If that's not enough, Bjørn Lomborg of fixtheclimate.com tells us:

"The solution is not to make fossil fuels more expensive; the solution is to make alternative energy cheaper."

In addition, Clive Crook writes in the Financial Times that:

"It is not enough for climate scientists and environment ministers to go to Copenhagen and tell each other how right they are. They also need to convince the public. National politics – the democratic process – is awfully inconvenient sometimes, but cannot be waved away."

Here are three more paragraph's I found especially interesting:

"Which leaves smearing the doubters as opponents of science itself. They are either stupid or evil; “flat-earthers” or “deniers” (akin, that is, to Holocaust deniers). Supporters of the consensus no doubt lap this up. The voters who need to be convinced are less likely to. On the whole, people object to being called ignorant or evil. That is not how you bring them round."

"As one Climategate e-mailer noted, we do not understand why global warming has paused lately: the models cannot account for it. But this is not for public consumption. It is best never mentioned, think governments and their scientific advisers. Just keep saying “flat-earthers” or, as the White House spokesman said the other day, “the notion that there is some kind of debate … is kind of silly.”

"Once scientists are engaged as advocates, science is in trouble. Like intelligence agencies fitting the facts to the policy, they are no longer to be trusted. The IPCC may be serving a righteous cause, but it is not the honest broker this process needs. It has made itself a political agency – at times, a propaganda unit. All this, the public can see."

Read the entire piece by Crook here…

The Nassau Institute does not deny climate change as our Bahamian Galileo would have people believe. They do question the source and what to do about it. Not to mention the recent cooling trend that seems to be ignored by some IPCC scientists that might see it as an inconvenient truth.