Welcome to a new Env-Econ game: Who said it? Submit your answer and reason in the comments. Anyone with the correct answer will receive a laurel and hardy handshake and a complemetary ticket to Env-Econ: The Musical when it is released. Here's the quote:
"This is a contemptible, weasel-worded attempt to gag scientific criticism, and it won't work...I don't believe they're interested in quality control when it comes to the reporting of science -- so long as it's on their side."
The possible answers:
- Environmental Activist and Politician Al Gore in response to members of the Bush Administration criticism of his documentary "An Inconvenient Truth."
- Director Mark Durkin in response to members of the British Royal Society's criticism of his documentary "The Great Global Warming Swindle."
- Env-Econ co-founder John Whitehead in response to an anonymous referee's criticism of his recently published paper "Temporal reliability of willingness to pay from the national survey of fishing, hunting and wildlife-associated recreation."
Update: Reader Nick wins the Env-Econ non-prize pack for correctly identifying Martin (Mark) Durkin as the correct answer. Read below the jump for more from the language artiste who is Durkin...
WARNING: If you are offended by naughty words, don't read below the jump.
Here's a description of an exchange in March between Mr. Durkin, Dr. Armond Leroi from Imperial College, London on Mr. Durkin's documentary "The Great Global Warming Swindle."
Dr Leroi e-mailed Mr Durkin about his use of data, concluding: “To put this bluntly: the data that you showed in your programme were . . . wrong in several different ways.” He copied Mr Singh into the exchange.
Mr Durkin replied to both later that morning, saying: “You’re a big daft cock.” Less than an hour later, Mr Singh, who has worked for the BBC, intervened to urge Mr Durkin to engage in serious debate. He wrote: “I suspect that you will have upset many people (if Armand is right), so it would be great if you could engage in the debate rather than just resorting to one-line replies. That way we could figure out what went wrong/ right and how do things better/ even better in the future.” Mr Durkin replied nine minutes later: “The BBC is now a force for bigotry and intolerance . . . Since 1940 we have had four decades of cooling, three of warming, and the last decade when temperature has been doing nothing.
“Why have we not heard this in the hours and hours of shit programming on global warming shoved down our throats by the BBC?
“Never mind an irresponsible bit of film-making. Go and f*** yourself.”
So here' my question: In the British press is it OK to print c*** and sh**, but not f***? Who decided where that line should be drawn? Or did Mr. Durkin self-censor, in which case I have to wonder...why?
