They don’t like it – when someone gives it to them in the newspapers.
‘How dare the prestige press – which we literally own – print the heresies of the enemy’ – they seem to go. ‘Think about the readership! ‘What thoughts would enter their minds were it our communion be questioned, disrupted?
Here’s Hereward Corley in the Financial Times:
Corley is talking about this article: a somewhat rambling piece about why Extinction Rebellion is different than the countless other environmental movements that have come before.
Stuck in right in the middle is this (emphasis mine):
If the new movement can focus on climate emergency, and not mind whether it is capitalists or communists who find ways to keep fossil fuels in the ground, preserve rainforests, achieve a quantum leap in battery storage, and gear up carbon capture and storage, it deserves to gain a much wider hearing.
You can look at the online mob started by one Andrea Sella in the twitter thread starting with the one below:
Think about it: Corley’s is a letter to an already published article of a few hundred words – it is already a response, to begin with.
But that doesn’t matter. It cannot be allowed to exist.
- How can the response pass without a response?
- This is ‘slander’! (do computer models have feelings, and reputations? Who is slandered here?
- He worked for big (palm) oil (Kees van der Leun seems to have forgotten he works for a renewable energy outfit himself)
… and so on and so forth.
If the timing is correct, Andrea Sella’s already dashed off a multi-signatory letter to the Financial Times castigating them for their audacity, their utter nerve.
In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if the mob whipped itself up into a frenzy and came down hard on the FT that they withdraw Corley’s letter.
I have to say though, I find Hereward’s Corley’s points to be largely correct: computer models are the only instruments that can produce climate projections, they are largely unable to simulate the past (1910-1940 warming, anyone?), warming is good, so is CO2, and Extinction Rebellion -induced policy disasters will only make life for those in developing countries worse. Not just for those in developing countries though.
More reason to suspect the letter won’t survive.