Please retweet this to expose their bullying, cowardly behavior
I have repeatedly offered him a copy of Apocalypse Never to read in advance, and did so again, in my reply, which is attached.
Despite being full of outright lies and falsehoods, it's mostly just weak tea.
But he presents zero evidence of any conflicts of interest because there is none.
He can't refute the science, and so he makes personal character attacks.
"He told Guardian Australia he thought the book “may well be the most important book on the environment ever written”.
Got that? Nothing has changed. There is no news.
Well, sure! I have that concern, too!
Which is why the first words of my article were, "Climate change is real."
Like Tom, Kerry praised Apocalypse Never, calling it "engaging and well researched."
The supposed disagreement is over this line:
"Climate change is not making natural disasters worse"
But there's no disagreement, just different definitions.
But it's not, actually.
Readfearn, despite his best efforts, was unable to find any conflicts of interest, because there aren't any, nor any inaccuracies in what I wrote, because there weren't any.
And you know what? That's fine! I don't agree with many of the articles *they* write
And yet we're all still friends & colleagues. Crazy, I know
In their pseudoscientific coverage of climate change, sycophantic coverage of renewables, & hit piece on me, The Guardian has made clear that its staff view ethics as an obstacle to their religious mission.
At the end of Apocalypse Never, I ask the question of how to respond to people like Readfearn & his comrades, who are not only in the grip of an apocalyptic religion, they don't realize it's a religion!
For me, nothing is more difficult — especially when they are grossly misrepresenting science and publicly smearing me.
Thank you & bless you all for your support