[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: INFOTERRA: Re: Burton Hamner's Big Lie Was Big Media Duped by The Skeptical Environmentalist



Finally, some one said what we all were thinking! Enough already.

At 08:44 AM 12/17/01 -0800, Paul Stoughton wrote:
>It's probably best just to put this one to bed, don't you think guys?
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Burton Hamner [mailto:bhamner@cleanerproduction.com]
>Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2001 9:57 AM
>To: Jon Entine; ashok sharma; ONE-L@CLVM.CLARKSON.EDU;
>p2tech@great-lakes.net; infoterra@cedar.at; apcpnet@tei.or.th
>Cc: IABS-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU
>Subject: Re: INFOTERRA: Re: Burton Hamner's Big Lie Was Big Media Duped
>byThe Skeptical Environmentalist
>
>
>Since Mr Entine continues to call me names for my little email posting, I
>think it is worthwhile to post it again!  Read it, and then what Mr Entine
>says about it.
>
>I wrote of the Lundborg controversy (NOT the book itself):
>
>"This story is excellent for revealing how easy it is to lie with statistics
>and how the media are so easily manipulated by its lack of expertise in
>covering environmental issues.  Should be a classic in enviro education and
>in media management."
>
>That is ALL I wrote.  I have not read the book and was simply forwarding an
>interesting email from someone else.  Read again, does it say WHO lies with
>statistics?
>
>According to Entine, I "very simplistically (and to me offensively) attacked
>the strawman... a purported leftist attack, it smacked off the tactics of
>the right...  Mr. Hamner's intemperate broadside..  poorly thought and out
>expressed verbiage disguised as "critical" thinking, which just perpetuates
>simplistic and highly divisive thinking... he, as well as so many others,
>are so easily seduced by the 'rhetoric of the kvetch'... "  There's more,
>read below!
>
>Draw your own conclusions regarding Mr Entine's opinions.  I think I will
>keep posting my little email again, Mr. Entine is becoming pretty funny as
>the foam drips from his lips.  His pejorative adjectives are like Pokemon: I
>Gotta Catch Em All!  "Rhetoric of the kvetch"??  I love it.
>
>Burt Hamner
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Jon Entine" <runjonrun@earthlink.net>
>To: "ashok sharma" <ashokaks@hotmail.com>; <bhamner@cleanerproduction.com>;
><ONE-L@CLVM.CLARKSON.EDU>; <p2tech@great-lakes.net>; <infoterra@cedar.at>;
><apcpnet@tei.or.th>
>Cc: <IABS-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
>Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2001 9:25 AM
>Subject: Re: INFOTERRA: Re: Burton Hamner's Big Lie Was Big Media Duped
>byThe Skeptical Environmentalist
>
>
> > One problem with your "analysis" Ashok--Although this may not be the case
>in
> > this instance, it is a common among ideologues to not understand and
> > therefore to confuse the difference between passion and fairness.
> >
> > My objection to Burton Hamner's posting was its smug ideological tone,
>which
> > assumed (in this case without even reading the book or many of its
>critics),
> > which side was with the angels. Moreover, it very simplistically (and to
>me
> > offensively) attacked the strawman, the "mainstream media". Although it
>was
> > a purported leftist attack, it smacked off the tactics of the right.
> >
> > What pray tell was my "lack of decency" in the context of Mr. Hamner's
> > intemperate broadside? My passion was directed at poorly thought and out
> > expressed verbiage disguised as "critical" thinking, which just
>perpetuates
> > simplistic and highly divisive thinking.
> >
> > This TomPaine posting is hardly a classic case of "media manipulation" as
> > Mr. Hamner suggests, unless he turns it on his head and acknowledges that
> > he, as well as so many others, are so easily seduced by the 'rhetoric of
>the
> > kvetch'. Very highly contested issue--especially major environmental
> > showdowns--show the Yin and Yang of the far left and far right in action.
> >
> > To suggest that my passionate appeal to look for nuance in such cases is
> > some how "indecent" is just plain bizarre. Are opinions only decent if
>they
> > are said sotto voce? Or is intellectual coherence a part of the equation
> > too?
> >
> > On 12/15/01 6:32 AM, "ashok sharma" <ashokaks@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Dear all,
> > >
> > > I strongly feel that Burt is righ in expecting an apology. Anyone is
> > > entirely entitled to one's views in as much as Mr. Entine in boiling
>over
> > > such views. I think, decency must lie at the core of all intellectual
> > > interaction. Differences of opinion are ofcourse enritching. Cheers.
> > >
> > > Ashok Sharma
> > > Cleantech foundation
> > > <cleantechfoundation@vsnl.net>
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > >
> > >> From: "Burton Hamner" <bhamner@cleanerproduction.com>
> > >> Reply-To: "Burton Hamner" <bhamner@cleanerproduction.com>
> > >> To: "Jon Entine" <runjonrun@earthlink.net>, "ONE-L"
> > >> <ONE-L@CLVM.CLARKSON.EDU>,        "p2tech" <p2tech@great-lakes.net>,
> > >> "Infoterra" <infoterra@cedar.at>,        "AP CP List"
><apcpnet@tei.or.th>
> > >> CC: <IABS-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
> > >> Subject: INFOTERRA: Re: Burton Hamner's Big Lie Was Big Media Duped by
>The
> > >> SkepticalEnvironmentalist
> > >> Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 13:34:50 -0800
> > >>
> > >> Excuse me for not being clear, Mr Entine.  I think the whole case is an
> > >> excellent example for discussion and teaching.  Your response in this
> > >> subject line is offensive, I do not appreciate having my name
>associated
> > >> with "Big Lie" and I expect an apology.
> > >>
> > >> Burton Hamner
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> ----- Original Message -----
> > >> From: "Jon Entine" <runjonrun@earthlink.net>
> > >> To: "Burton Hamner" <bhamner@cleanerproduction.com>; "ONE-L"
> > >> <ONE-L@CLVM.CLARKSON.EDU>; "p2tech" <p2tech@great-lakes.net>;
>"Infoterra"
> > >> <infoterra@cedar.at>; "AP CP List" <apcpnet@tei.or.th>
> > >> Cc: <IABS-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
> > >> Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 10:42 AM
> > >> Subject: Burton Hamner's Big Lie Was Big Media Duped by The
> > >> SkepticalEnvironmentalist
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>> Burton:
> > >>>
> > >>> "Excellent"??
> > >>>
> > >>> You can't be serious!
> > >>>
> > >>> Have you actually READ the book, Woodward's tendentious article, and
>the
> > >>> various polemical "analyses" by selected "reviewers".
> > >>>
> > >>> Woodward's article provides no analysis at all...it amounts to an ad
> > >> hominem
> > >>> (poorly constructed) by the way attack on Lomborg. It's gutter
> > >> journalism
> > >> at
> > >>> its worst. To site this as an example of "great journalism" is a
>little
> > >>> frightening. No respectable magazine or newspaper would print much of
> > >> the
> > >>> garbage found on Tom Paine about this issue ... It's mostly
>ideological
> > >>> rubbish.
> > >>>
> > >>> As a progressive on environmental issues, I find this offensive. And
>I'm
> > >>> amazed that any serious academician would fall for this. Sadly, it's
> > >>> illustrative of why the some aspects of the environmental movement
>have
> > >> lost
> > >>> so much credibility. What happened to critical thinking--of the "left"
> > >> and
> > >>> the loony extremist right?
> > >>>
> > >>> As for the reviewers comments...READ them and match them up against
>the
> > >>> book. In almost every case, they are taking very narrow elements of
>the
> > >> book
> > >>> and contesting some aspects of the data, but not mustering any real
> > >> analysis
> > >>> of the overall conclusions.
> > >>>
> > >>> As you know, this is highly contested terrain. There will be
> > >> disagreements.
> > >>> But selectively contesting some of the statistical analysis does not
> > >>> automatically invalidate major theses in the book. In this case, not
>ONE
> > >> of
> > >>> the "reviewers" lay much of a glove on Lomborg's overall analysis.
> > >>>
> > >>> Again...if you disagree..cite some actual examples, rather than the
> > >>> collection of mostly ad hominem attacks by well known ideologues who
> > >> have
> > >> a
> > >>> lot to lose by a more critical look at highly contentious issues.
> > >>>
> > >>> For example, people like Lester Brown. David Nemtzow, and Devra Davis,
> > >> among
> > >>> others, are not very credible independent thinks on the issues in
>which
> > >> they
> > >>> polemicize about. PLEASE..read what they write. It's selective
> > >> journalism,
> > >>> which makes Lomborg's book all the more impressive. Many of those who
> > >> write
> > >>> are activists who have a long history of distorting (or as is usually
> > >> the
> > >>> case, not understanding) complex environmental and social issues. For
> > >> the
> > >>> most part, they are tin horn demagogues.
> > >>>
> > >>> Does Lomborg reach some questionable conclusions...perhaps, but he is
> > >> very
> > >>> transparent about his research -- which means he acknowledges that
> > >> analyzing
> > >>> these issues is a process. The same cannot be said for the analysis of
> > >> some
> > >>> of those cited in the Tom Paine articles.
> > >>>
> > >>> Exercise critical thinking about this, don't just embrace the
> > >> ideological
> > >>> rhetoric of the left and the right.
> > >>>
> > >>> In the few cases in which the critics are credible, such as EO Wilson
>on
> > >>> species extinction, not of the comments undermine Lomborg's analysis.
> > >> Read
> > >>> it in context.
> > >>>
> > >>> Even Woodward acknowledges, grudgingly, that dealing with statistics
>in
> > >>> hotly polemical issues is very contentious--note his reference to
> > >>> Greenpeace's long history of media manipulation and issuing distorted
> > >> (and
> > >>> very unprogressive) environmental "studies" to justify breaking the
>law.
> > >>>
> > >>> [By the way, if any one is interested, my 11,000 word case study of
>the
> > >>> Brent Spar/Greenpeace/Shell fiasco, which deconstructs the media
> > >>> manipulation by both sides in this affair, is now available as a
>chapter
> > >> in
> > >>> the Routledge published book: Case Histories in Business Ethics, which
> > >> is
> > >>> being published this month in both hardback and paperback. You can
>find
> > >>> details at Amazon.com...the UK site is:
> > >>>
> > >>
>http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0415231442/ref%3Ded%5Fra%5Fof%5Fdp/
> > >>> 202-1071582-5686251 ]
> > >>>
> > >>> Jon Entine
> > >>>
> > >>> On 12/13/01 9:14 AM, "Burton Hamner" <bhamner@cleanerproduction.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> This story is excellent for revealing how easy it is to lie with
> > >> statistics
> > >>>> and how the media are so easily manipulated by its lack of expertise
> > >> in
> > >>>> covering environmental issues.  Should be a classic in enviro
> > >> education
> > >> and
> > >>>> in media management.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Burton
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> Colin Woodard's article, "THE TABLOID ENVIRONMENTALIST, How a
> > >>>>> Pseudo-Scientist Duped the Big Media -- Big Time" is now available
>at
> > >>>>> http://www.tompaine.com. An op-ad about this was published in
>today's
> > >>>>> New York Times.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> It features how The New York Times, Time Magazine, The Economist,
> > >> etc.
> > >>>>> were suckered into printing uncritical and glowing reviews of Bjorn
> > >>>>> Lomborg's book, The Skeptical Environmentalist.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Grist Magazine also published a series ("Something is Rotten in the
> > >>>>> State of Denmark") refuting Lomborg's assertions,
> > >>>>> http://www.gristmagazine.com. Two of the nine articles were written
> > >>>>> by WRI experts, Dr. Allen Hammond and Emily Matthews.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> If you want to know more about the controversy, see our media guide
> > >> at
> > >>>>> http://www.wri.org/press/mk_lomborg.html.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> *****************************************************
> > >>>>> Adlai J. Amor
> > >>>>> Media Director
> > >>>>>  World Resources Institute
> > >>>>> 10 G Street, NE, Washington, DC 20002, USA
> > >>>>> Tel: (+202) 729 7736 * Fax: (+202) 729 7616
> > >>>>> Email: aamor@wri.org
> > >>>>> Website: http://www.wri.org
> > >>>>> *****************************************************
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> --
> > >>> Jon Entine
> > >>> RuffRun
> > >>> 6178 Grey Rock Rd.
> > >>> Agoura Hills, CA 91301
> > >>> (818) 991-9803 [FAX] 991-9804
> > >>> http://www.jonentine.com
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> ----
> > >> This message was sent by INFOTERRA@CEDAR.AT
> > >> To signoff from the list, send an email to majordomo@cedar.at
> > >> the message body should read "unsubscribe infoterra" (without quotes).
> > >> Visit http://www.cedar.at/unep/infoterra/index.html
> > >> for more info, list commands, and mail archives (searchable).
> > >> ----
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ASHOK SHARMA, SECRETARY,
> > > HIMACHAL PRODUCTIVITY COUNCIL,
> > > UDYOG BHAWAN, SHIMLA 171001,INDIA.
> > > Ph: 91223973 ; FX: 91 177 225530
> > > email:ashokaks@hotmail.com
> > >
> > >
> > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
> > > http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Jon Entine
> > RuffRun
> > 6178 Grey Rock Rd.
> > Agoura Hills, CA 91301
> > (818) 991-9803 [FAX] 991-9804
> > http://www.jonentine.com
> >
> >
> >