Arguing for a purpose

16 May 2005
When Benny Peiser responded to UK chief scientist David King on openDemocracy earlier this week, it provoked a sharp response from Charlie Kronick of Greenpeace.

Benny Peiser came back with a determined riposte.

Now William Connelley makes a detailed analysis of Benny Peiser's arguments.

The issues here have been explored elsewhere, including William Connelley's own blog Stoat. (Connelley is also a contributor to RealClimate.org.)

Some, including writer and activist Paul Kingsnorth, argue that it's not worth going over this ground again.

My view is that in a debate for a worldwide readership, many of whom many not have come to these issues before, it is worth exploring these differences.

Caspar Henderson

Had enough of ‘alternative facts’? openDemocracy is different Join the conversation: get our weekly email


We encourage anyone to comment, please consult the oD commenting guidelines if you have any questions.
Audio available Bookmark Check Language Close Comments Download Facebook Link Email Newsletter Newsletter Play Print Share Twitter Youtube Search Instagram WhatsApp yourData