On 3 April, I posted about an article in Nature which contained some strong criticism of the forecasts of the IPCC as being overly optimist in projections for the potential technological reduction in emissions of greenhouse gases. (Nature quotes someone as calling it a "bombshell".) Nature followed up with commentary from several global warming figures, some criticising, some agreeing with, the original commentary. (To get to the articles now, go to the John Tierney link below and follow his links. News@Nature's way of stuffing around with certain links only being available for 3 days irritates me no end.)
So why hasn't anyone in the Australian blogosphere picked up on this? I would've thought it was of great interest to many bloggers I read regularly: Catallaxy, Harry Clarke, Quiggin, even Robert Merkel at LP. One would have thought it might even be of interest to Tim Blair or Andrew Bolt from a greenhouse skeptic's point of view. (I even emailed to Bolt about it, as I thought it a story deserving publicity.)
So why have precisely none of the above (as far as I can see) noted the story? (Not my post; the story itself.)
For those of you interested (such tiny number that there seems to be!) there is more about the article in John Tierney's column in the New York Times of 3 April.
A Google news search indicates that no Australian media outlet has reported the story either. What's wrong with you all?
2 comments:
A minor hint. Stories referring to me are more likely to turn up on my radar if my name is spelt correctly.
On the actual story, Garnaut has been making the same point, though in a slightly different way, with more explicit emphasis on China.
Er, sorry, it's corrected. But as I said above, I wasn't really complaining that people hadn't picked up on it via me - I have a small readership generally, with presumably very, very few from the Left. I was complaining that people and the Australian media hadn't picked up on it anyway.
Post a Comment