The Washington Post disparages a Nobel Prize winner, John Clauser, for saying “there is no climate crisis.”
The article by Maxine Joselow reveals two serious examples of inappropriate innuendo in covering a conference on climate change that featured John Clauser.
She chides him for taking advantage of his Nobel prize-winning status:
“His recent denial of global warming has alarmed top climate scientists, who warn that he is using his stature to mislead the public about a planetary emergency ” (This sentence is in bold.)
And she writes as if somehow the Nobel Prize for physics changed his mind (a point emphasized in the headline).
“The event showcased the remarkable shift that Clauser, 80, has undergone since winning one of the world’s most prestigious awards for his groundbreaking experiments with light particles in the 1970s.”
“Post hoc, ergo propter hoc”? He changed his mind as a result of winning the prize? Joselow gives no evidence that he changed his mind, much less that he is “using his stature to mislead the public.” Chances are, no one asked him before he became a Nobelist.
Image above by Alicja on Pixabay.