Some of you may have heard from one news source or another that in Britain, a high court ruled that "An Inconvenient Truth," when screened as part of a lesson plan in secondary schools, must include certain caveats.
Some of YOU may have subsequently learned that the caveats are reasonable, and that the high court ALSO ruled that the film was, on the whole, scientifically sound.
Far less of you, though, have heard that the gentleman who brought the suit was financed by British companies who fund studies specifically to refute global warming. Like the American studies funded by people at Exxon/Mobil.
I think a lot of people hear "British high court" and think, "Ah ha! This is not an American or Middle-Eastern body, so it must not have anything to do with energy politics!" BZZT. You lose. Energy politics are more global than you think.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Well written article.
Post a Comment