"We can fix this," Schneider said.
To do that we need to get some broadbased support, to capture the public's imagination. That, of course, entails getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have.
--- Steven Schneider, Quoted in Discover, pp. 45-48, Oct. 1989; and American Physical Society, APS News August/September 1996.
"Scientists who want to attract attention to themselves, who want to attract great funding to themselves, have to (find a) way to scare the public . . . and this you can achieve only by making things bigger and more dangerous than they really are."
-- Petr Chylek, Professor of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, commenting on reports that Greenland's glaciers are melting. Halifax Chronicle-Herald, August 22, 2001
"Emphasis on extreme scenarios may have been appropriate at one time, when the public and decision-makers were relatively unaware of the global warming issue, and energy sources such as "synfuels," shale oil and tar sands were receiving strong consideration."
-- James Hansen, stated in presentation to Council on Environmental Quality, June 12, 2003
"The data don't matter. We're not basing our recommendations [for reductions in carbon dioxide emissions] upon the data. We're basing them upon the climate models"
(Chris Folland, UK Meteorological Office)
That last statement is the craziest of the lot. Weathermen where I live base their forecasts on weather models and they miss that about half the time or more. So how are these idiots determine what is going to happen in 50-100 years based on their models when, as he said, they don’t use data. Must be using a crystal ball or getting this from a vision of some sort.