We make no representation, explicit or otherwise, about the completeness, accuracy, or consistency of the data on our website, of the integrity of the services we provide, or of those with which we may interoperate. – ECOworld Disclaimer
Don’t say you weren’tย warned.
The โenvironmental publishing companyโ ECOworld promises to keep โnature and technology in harmony,โ but the content of the website and the clear bias of editor Ed (Redwood) Ring shows that Ed would be more forthright if he adopted a nickname that demonstrates more clearly his leanings, say Ed (We Need More Freeways)ย Ring.
In a recent, strident and extended editor’s note, Freeway Ring complains that climate change denial has fallen into humiliating disfavour in the mainstream media. He complains that people who want to continue arguing about global warming are โbranded as ideological fanatics and corporateย shills.โ
Well, if the shoeย fitsโฆ
If Freeway Ring is NOT a corporate shill, we invite him to share the details of his funding and prove the point. (That would, of course, leave the possibility that he is still an ideological fanatic, but I suspect he might adjust his ideology pretty quickly if the money ranย out.)
But the sweetest part of Freeway’s entreaty for confusion in the climate conversation isย this:
If there is a โdenial industry,โ who would benefit? A handful of underfunded thinkย tanks?โ
A reasonable answer to the first question might be โExxonMobilโ – the largest and most profitable corporation in the history of the world. But the second question – rhetorical, surely – is flat-outย hilarious.
Freeway Ring doesn’t want to defend the integrity of his services, or of his collaborators, because they areย indefensible.
The concluding paragraph in this editor’s noteย begins:
Many conscientious people, relatively free of biases, simply feel climate science is beyondย them.โ
Quite so, and Freeway Ring and his buddies clearly plan to take full advantage of those people. There appears to be no room left forย shame.
