Benny Peiser has overseen the GWPF since it was founded. His qualifications in sports and exercise sciences seem to provide little insight into climate science. He is a visiting student at Buckingham University and ostensibly conveys that he is the Education Building of the Institute for Economic Research (IEA).
John Constable, former energy editor at GWPF, is also embedded in Buckingham. His 2011 report, which the government recommended “encourage fuel switching to gas,” was funded by the Energy People Trust in Scotland, and his 2012 report was commissioned by Calor Gas. That’s what his job was Rejected By the then sector of energy and climate change as a “manifesto for imported gas.”
Pier
Professor Terence Kelly, former vice president of Buckingham University, is also part of the GWPF’s so-called “Academic Advisory Council.” His latest book, title Sex, science, profitthere are few at the cutting edge of climate research.
Professor Michael Kelly has a seemingly impressive academic qualification, but his papers often avoid blind peer reviews and are published in open access journals. This ducking of external scrutiny through open peer review is a common practice among GWPF authors.
Professor Julia Steinberger In a letter to Kelly, I am particularly contested as a scientist at the GWPF, claiming that their paper is a “peer review.” Papers referenced by the GWPF commissioned authors are not blind reviews, but are surrounded by other GWPF members.
“Another feature of the GWPF is its tendency to pick both from their own work and from large academic papers. This has been heavily criticized in the media, but this approach still continues with the GWPF.”
GWPF Science Editor David White House never wrote for a peer-reviewed journal on the subject of climate change. Skeptic science. Lawson’s only approval appears to have been his Pier Reviews made so far within the Academy Hall of GWPF.
testimony
Neither Michael Alder nor Professor Anthony Barrett of the Academic Advisory Council have any relevant qualifications to maintain climate science.
According to Barrett Wikipedia Page: “Bullett” […] Alkenyl anions, Ynolates, novel isocyanates, iron vinylidine, heteroatom functionalized nitroalkenes, and ring-closing alkene and enine metathesis reactions have been widely contributing to the synthesis of β-lactams. “All very impressive, but nothing shows that he is taken seriously by the climate.
More obviously compromised by the fossil fuel bonds are Professor Gautam Kalghatgi, chairman of the advisory committee, and Professor Peter Dobson, member of the council. Kalghatgi worked for Shell Research in the UK for 31 years, then for eight years at Saudi Aramco. Dobson Research conducted Establishing the BP-funded Oxford Energy Association, while also taking the energy and decarbonization technology of the Oxford Petrochemical Research Center.
The list of people with obvious conflicts of interest continues.
Notorious
In 2018, Professor William Happer was revealed by a secret Greenpeace UK investigation, which was paid $8,000 from Peabody Energy to promote the benefits of rising CO levels.
Vincent Cortorillo of the University of Didero, University of Paris, Controversy On top of his paper published in Earth and Planet Science Lettershe argues that it is the Earth’s magnetic field that is driving climate change. He denies that his research is influenced by the relationship between oil company Total and Schlumberger.
Paul Reiter, professor emeritus of medical entomology at the Pasteur Institute in Paris, admits that he is “not a climatologist or an expert on sea levels or polar regions.” However, he is on the Scientific and Economic Advisory Committee of the Center for Public Policy Based on Annapolis Science, a US think tank that received $763,500 in funding from ExxonMobil.
Dr. Samuel Furfari, a professor of energy geopolitics, spent his career in fossil fuels, including a long tenure as Director of the Energy Bureau of the European Commission. His PhD focused Coal gasification.
As a zoologist, I cannot argue that Dr. Matt Ridley has expertise in geoscience, but his PhD examined the common pheasant mating system! – He is one of the most prolific contributors Misleading Op-Eds To the right-wing media. He is famous Use data to undermine climate scienceand his previous ownership of the mine certainly undermines his credibility as an objective commentator.
Deception
Some GWPF associates may simply be judged by the friends they hold.
Ian Primer, a professor of mining geology at the University of Adelaide, serves as director of several mining and resource companies, and is closely associated with the mother of oil funding advertisers. Heartland Research Institute Which of Relax Environmentalists to Osama bin Laden and Charles Manson. He admits that “not all global warming alerts are murderers or tyrants.”
Astrophysicists Neil Shavib, Henrik Svensmark, Christopher Essex and physicist Lawrence Gould also coincide with Heartland, the latter of whom are panelists at the 9th International Conference on Climate Change.
this week Ecologist We contacted the scholar named in this article and provided the right to reply. Professor Dobson replied. “I’m a bit surprised by this rather pathetic propaganda,” he said. “We should add that going to net zero carbon is ridiculous, as CO2 is not a major greenhouse gas, and steam is a long way to go.”
However, NASA states: Cause global warming. Instead, that’s the result of it. ”
Some within the GWPF may not be personally funded or interested by the fossil fuel industry, but they still have Contaminated by the association The GWPF itself is supported by entities such as Koch Industries and the oil-funded Sarah Scaife Foundation.
The GWPF argues that the scientific consensus on climate change is exaggerated and that the problem has not been resolved. Even the BBC has fallen due to this cheating, according to former environmental reporter Roger Harabin.
disaster
He spoke about the climate A story being spiked If the deniers don’t know that they provide a false “balance” – Practices criticized in 2011 Jones Report He criticized broadcasters for suggesting that Nigel Lawson’s views hold equal weight to those of the scientific community.
Right-wing press and social media now have the biggest megaphones when it comes to attacking net zero aspirations. The ongoing platform of deniers and delayed people from the GWPF or the wider Tuffton Street Cabal calls for us to remain vigilant about the source and motivations of commentators.
And there’s physics The blog summarizes frustration. “This is a matter of providing this platform to GWPF, as it allows us to assert credibility on this platform, but it requires thorough effort to put the discussion in the context.
David Suzukiinfluential environmentalists have clearly stated it. “Sound skepticism is good. Criticism of marine research has led to an understanding and strengthening of methodology and analysis.
“But if we deny the vast amount of evidence and the validity of science, do we ignore “personal beliefs” and ignore what is in front of us to maintain “business as normal” practice?
“They will all put us on the path to disaster.”
This author
Tom Hardy Frsa has over 40 years of education experience. International Journal of Art and Design EducationAs a columnist for Time Education Supplementand author/editor of several academic works on educational practice. He works as an education consultant for Prince’s Educational Institute and leads the subject of qualifications and curriculum development institutions reporting to the Ministry of Education. He’s working now Media revolution.
