The latest right wing conspiracy theories pushed by Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) and Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) make the birthers seem rational. Think Progress has the story.
A former contractor has come forward to denounce foreign oil giant BP and the “cutthroat individuals” running the oil disaster response. On Friday, contractor-turned-whistleblower Adam Dillon told New Orleans television station WDSU he was fired “after taking photos that he believes were related to the use of dispersants and to the cleanup of the oil.” As a BP liaison, he had rebuffed reporters’ attempts to observe cleanup operations in Grand Isle, LA, in June, before being promoted to the BP Command Center near Houma, LA. At the command center BP manages the private contractors running practically every aspect of the spill response. Dillon, a former U.S. Army Special Operations soldier, “has lost faith in the company in charge”:
There are some very great, hardworking individuals in there. But the bottom line is just about money. There are some very cutthroat individuals. They’re not worried about cleaning up that spill as it is. . . .
I will never have loyalty to this company. I will always have loyalty to my country. And my country comes first. What this company is doing to this country right now is just wrong.
Before he was fired, Dillon was “confined and interrogated for almost an hour.” WDSU’s Scott Walker will air more of his interview with Adam Dillon on Monday night.
Dillon’s troubling firsthand account joins other reports from the likes of wives of Gulf Coast fishermen and independent scientists who are breaking the media blackout on BP’s private army of contractors.
New York Times to media: Exonerations of climate science and National Academy report should “receive as much circulation” as “the manufactured controversy known as Climategate”
Journalism in the greenhouse … or the glass house?
There have since been several reports upholding the U.N.’s basic findings, including a major assessment in May from the National Academy of Sciences. This assessment not only confirmed the relationship between climate change and human activities but warned of growing risks “” sea level rise, drought, disease “” that must swiftly be addressed by firm action to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases.
Given the trajectory the scientists say we are on, one must hope that the academy’s report, and Wednesday’s debunking of Climategate, will receive as much circulation as the original, diversionary controversies.
The New York Times had a great editorial today, “A Climate Change Corrective.” Certainly the recent exonerations and NAS study deserve much, much, much more media attention.
It most be pointed out, however, that the NYT overhyped the “manufactured controversy known as Climategate” as much if not more than other media outlets, from the beginning:
- Here’s what we know so far: CRU’s emails were hacked, the 2000s will easily be the hottest decade on record, and the planet keeps warming thanks to us! The NY Times blows the story
- Anti-science idealogues spin the NY Times public editor, Clark Hoyt, on “Climategate”
- N.Y. Times and Elisabeth Rosenthal Face Credibility Siege over Unbalanced Climate Coverage
The NYT has had multiple front-page “teach the (manufactured) controversy” stories (see also In yet another front-page journalistic lapse, the NYT once again equates non-scientists “” Bastardi, Coleman, and Watts (!) “” with climate scientists and Brulle: “The NYT doesn’t need to go to European conferences to find out why public opinion on climate change has shifted”¦. Just look in the mirror”).
Where are the multiple front-page stories on the exonerations and NAS study? For that matter, let’s remember that the NY Times rejected op-ed/letter from 255 National Academy of Sciences members defending climate science integrity.
Still, we take what we can get from the islands of sanity — the Tuvalus — at major outlets like the NYT. Here’s the full editorial:
It’s the hundredth anniversary of the publication of the first Tom Swift novels. Wikipedia notes:
The Tom Swift books have been credited with laying the foundations for success of American science fiction and with establishing the edisonade (stories focusing on brilliant scientists and inventors) as a basic cultural myth….
A number of prominent figures, including Steve Wozniak and Isaac Asimov, have cited “Tom Swift” as an inspiration…. According to Wozniak, reading the Tom Swift books made him feel “that engineers can save the world from all sorts of conflict and evil”.
The books sold over 30 million copies worldwide. A key thematic feature: “In general, the books portray science and technology as wholly beneficial in their effects.” And that remains, I think, another “basic cultural myth” — one that is not wholly beneficial in its effect, as I have discussed many times (see “The breakthrough technology illusion“).
There were multiple series. I read the Tom Swift, Jr. books because my brother Dave gave me his copies. Dave is a multi-decade science fiction aficionado, humorist, and interpreter, so I asked him for his thoughts on Tom Swift, which follow:
This while creating jobs, cutting oil dependence, and slashing pollution
CAP’s Dan Weiss explained the ‘energy-only bill’ mirage: Why an energy bill could fail without pollution reduction measures or revenue. Now, according to the Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO) recent analysis of the American Power Act, released July 7th, we know the APA would not only cut carbon emissions, but also the nation’s budget deficit: $19 billion by 2020. CAP intern Laurel Hunt has the story.