Just who’s shilling here?

David Suzuki writes that I am an “industry shill.” A quick visit to the website of the International Climate Science Coalition, the group I lead, shows that this is false. We explain that we have received no money from industry, unlike the David Suzuki Foundation, foundations or government.

David Suzuki writes that I am an “industry shill.” A quick visit to the website of the International Climate Science Coalition, the group I lead, shows that this is false. We explain that we have received no money from industry, unlike the David Suzuki Foundation, foundations or government.

Calling us “deniers” also makes no sense. We promote the idea that, because climate changes all the time, we must help vulnerable people adapt to inevitable changes. And, as Prof. Tim Patterson of the Department of Earth Sciences at Carleton University testified before the House of Commons Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development in 2005, “Based on the paleoclimatic data I and others have collected, it’s obvious that climate is and always has been variable. In fact, the only constant about climate is change; it changes continually. We certainly have no chance of stopping this natural phenomenon.”

So Patterson and his peers deny that they deny climate change — they are denial deniers. The “deniers” label is usually an attempt to equate those who question political correctness on climate to Holocaust deniers. It is a nasty logical fallacy referred to as ad hominem — “against the man” instead of the idea.

It is interesting that, in response to following the same public relations techniques often pursued by DSF, we are drawing this direct ad hominem fire rather than a rational rebuttal of the science we present. Is Suzuki’s point of view so weak it cannot withstand civilized discussion?

Tom Harris, Executive Director

International Climate Science Coalition,

Ottawa