David Suzuki insults, but won't debate

David Suzuki, Canadian environmental activist

Image via Wikipedia

As the climate scare fizzles, Canada’s celebrity environmentalist resorts to ad hominem attacks

Guest post by David R. Legates

David Suzuki has never met, debated or even spoken with my colleague, scientist Willie Soon. But as more people dismiss Mr. Suzuki’s scare stories about global warming cataclysms, Suzuki has resorted to personal attacks against Dr. Soon and others who disagree with him.

Dr. Soon’s brilliant research into the sun’s role in climate change has helped make millions aware that carbon dioxide’s influence is far less than Suzuki wants them to think. In a recent column that was picked up by the Huffington Post and other media outlets, Suzuki attacked Dr. Soon, mostly with a recycled Greenpeace “investigation” that is itself nothing more than a rehash of tiresome (and libelous) misstatements, red herrings and outright lies. It’s time to set the record straight.

First, the alleged corporate cash. Suzuki claims Dr. Soon received “more than $1 million over the past decade” from US energy companies – and implies that Dr. Soon lied to a US Senate committee about the funding. In fact, the research grants were received in the years following the Senate hearing; the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics took nearly half of the money (for “administration”), and what was left covered Dr. Soon’s salary, research, and other expenses including even toner for his printer.

By comparison, the Suzuki Foundation spends some $7 million every year on its “educational” and pressure campaigns – many of them in conjunction with various PR agencies, renewable energy companies, other foundations and environmental activist groups. They all stand to profit handsomely from Suzuki’s causes, especially “catastrophic climate change” and campaigns to replace “harmful” fossil fuels with subsidized, land-intensive, low-energy-output, “eco-friendly” wind and solar facilities.

Under another convoluted arrangement, the Suzuki Foundation, David and Lucile Packard Foundation, Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, University of Alberta, US-based SeaWeb and other organizations provided or divvied up some $23 million, to promote an anti-fish-farming campaign. The years-long effort suddenly and inexplicably ended – and all traces of it disappeared from the Suzuki Foundation website – after Vancouver-based researcher Vivian Krause raised serious questions about its claims.

And yet Suzuki is criticizing Dr. Soon – while alarmist climate catastrophe researchers share over $6 billion annually in US and Canadian taxpayer money, and millions more in corporate cash, to link every natural phenomenon to global warming and promote renewable “alternatives” to fossil fuels.

If it is wrong to receive grants from organizations that have taken “advocacy” positions, then virtually every scientist with whom Suzuki has associated would be guilty. Even Suzuki recognizes this. “We should look at the science, and not at who is paying for the research,” he wrote recently.

But if he truly believes  real science must stand or fall on its own merits, not on the source of its funding – why does he insist on double standards and continue to attack Dr. Soon over his funding sources?

Second, Suzuki repeats an absurd Greenpeace claim that Dr. Soon tried to “undermine” the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s “peer-reviewed” work. In reality, scientists are required to examine, review and even criticize other scientists’ research – especially when it is used to justify slashing the hydrocarbon energy on which our jobs, living standards and civilization depend.  In reality, the IPCC solicits reviews of its publications but is under no obligation to address any criticisms that scientists raise – in contrast to the normal peer-review process.

Moreover, the IPCC refuses to conduct its own quality control – and repeatedly promotes scare stories about rising seas, melting Himalayan glaciers, disappearing Amazon rainforests, more severe storms and droughts, and other disasters. By now anyone familiar with the Climategate and IPCC scandals knows these headline-grabbing claims are based on nothing more than exaggerated computer model outputs, deliberate exclusion of contrary findings, questionable air temperature station locations, and even “research” by environmental activists.

Third, Suzuki’s most egregious distortion of reality involves the Climate Research journal’s handling of two papers by Drs. Willie Soon and Sallie Baliunas, regarding solar links to climate change. The publisher concluded that the manuscript editor had “properly analyzed the evaluations and requested appropriate revisions,” and the authors “revised their manuscripts accordingly.”

However, when Dr. Hans von Storch became editor-in-chief, he circulated a hurriedly written editorial declaring that the review process had failed, and the Soon-Baliunas manuscripts should not have been published, due to alleged “methodological flaws.” He intended to publish the editorial prior to a US Senate committee hearing, thereby discrediting Dr. Soon. von Storch even asserted that Soon and Baliunas should be barred from publishing again in Climate Research – a disciplinary action usually levied only for convictions of plagiarism or fraud.

The publisher refused to publish the editorial until the editorial board could be consulted – which meant after the hearing. So von Storch and other editors and review editors resigned. Senator Jeffords highlighted the resignations during the hearing. But fortunately, I was a hearing witness and provided a correct account.

Nevertheless, after the hearing, the publisher changed his mind and said the Soon-Baliunas paper should not have been published. I resigned as review editor because I felt the journal had succumbed to pressure from activist scientists and was no longer an unbiased outlet for healthy climate change debates.

Climategate made it clear that the truth was even worse. The emails paint a vivid picture of advocacy scientists strong-arming the publisher, threatening to destroy Climate Research by boycotting the journal, and intimidating or colluding with editors and grant program officers to channel funding to alarmists, publish only their work, and reject funding requests and publications from any scientists who disagreed with them on global warming chaos. Suzuki’s increasingly strident and desperate attacks mirror their campaign, as do Al Gore’s – and no wonder.

The global warming scare has fizzled. The sun has entered a new “quiet” phase, and average global temperatures have been stable for 15 years. Climate conferences in Copenhagen and elsewhere have gone nowhere. Kyoto has become little more than a footnote in history. Countries that agreed to “climate stabilization” policies are retreating from that untenable position. The public realizes that climate science is far from “settled.” The climate-chaos religion is about to go the way of Baal-worship.

Most important, Canadians, Americans and Europeans alike are beginning to realize that the real dangers are not from global warming.

They are from potentially cooler global temperatures that could hamstring agriculture – and from government (and Suzuki-advocated) policies that are driving energy prices so high that companies are sending jobs to Asia, and millions of families can no longer afford to heat and cool their homes, drive their cars, or pay for electricity that powers all the wondrous technologies that make our lives infinitely better, safer and healthier than even kings and queens enjoyed just a century ago.

 

Dr. David R. Legates is Professor of Climatology at the University of Delaware and a former review editor for the journal Climate Research.  He has worked with Dr. Willie Soon since they were the first to uncover the flaws in the so-called ‘Hockey Stick’ in 2002.

 

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Latitude

“Suzuki has resorted to personal attacks against Dr. Soon”
That’s the default setting……….the more they do it, the more they turn people off and open their eyes

Jack

The Suzuki/Gore nexus are terrified that the AGW gravy train is ending. I hope that it costs them their fortunes.

“In a recent column that was picked up by the Huffington Post and other media outlets, … “
No! Not the Huffington Post! (What the shrinking-circulation ‘New York Times’ may not see fit to give ‘life’ to, the AOL-acquired Hufffing and Puffington post will does …)
Say it isn’t true Buckey!
/pure sarc

Fred from Canuckistan

Us Great White Northers have been watching Davey “Dr. Fruit Fly” Suzuki for years because the Canadian Broadcorping Castration has provided him with a TV Bully Pulpit from which to rant & rave and flog his “Humans Suck” message.
He still is much loved by the warmista/progressive/PETA crowed up here but anyone else that can read & think for themselves knows he is well past his best before date and plumbs new depths of enviro hypocrisy with every new Press Release from his “Foundation”
I met him years ago . . . he was a bitter, angry man who refused to forgive and can’t forget that his family was one of the thousands of Japanese who got a rough go in WW2. Can’t change that but his on going campaign for vengeance for what happened in WW2 makes him a loser.

“all the wondrous technologies that make our lives infinitely better, safer and healthier than even kings and queens enjoyed just a century ago” so often forgotten by so many.

Bystander

Snort – you guys complaining about personal attacks on scientists.
Now that is ironic… Do y’all ever read what you write?

Craig Moore

It’s terrible to age ungracefully. I remember watching Suziki on the CBC back in the 70’s. I liked his programs. Today he is but a shell of his former self.

Wil

Oh, boy, David Suzuki – the Canadian Paris Hilton of poor taste, fashion, and common sense. Famous because of the CBC, the Canadian AGW jihadist TV station run by the left and far left wing on the taxpayer dime here in Canada. Personally speaking I’m severely struggling to write without using every swear word in my arsenal – Suzuki is that detested by the majority here in Canada. My hometown, Fort McMurray, Alberta home of the Canadian oil sands and Suzuki have a long and mutually relationship built on pure loathing. Of course the coward doesn’t have the gonads to debate Soon – he doesn’t even have the gonads to debate anyone. Suzuki has recommended all “deniers” should by jailed – and still the CBC highlights this fool and throws big bucks for his eco-fanatic end of the world CBC television show. And like all AGW eco-fanatics Suzuki’s audience are the left and the far left he rarely if ever fails to disappoint. Thank GOD we have a conservative majority government in Canada who removed us from the Kyoto accord driving Suzuki and his eco-freaks into near suicidal frenzied of agony. Trust me Soon would do well to ignore this Chicken Little – Suzuki’s day has passed by him by – however like all AGW fanatics who have lost the war we’re just beginning to witness the desperation of the true believers – or the lost of the easy AGW revenue base. Personally thinking – I believe it’s the latter. And of course fading into irrelevance – now that’s justice!

Jason

Suzuki and his wife cry themselves to sleep over global warming every night . I think the cheese fell off this man’s cracker awhile ago.

Robert of Ottawa

The fruit fly guy who’s charity status should be revoked.

JEM

Suzuki is beneath discussion.

Bruce Cobb

Can a Leopard change its spots? He can’t help it. The CAGW ideology has him under its spell. Well, ok, the money, power and fame aren’t bad, either.

Amazing that $1m of research can overturn $6bn of research really.
Also that out of the $6bn there wasn’t enough money to pay for someone to come in and do the filing a couple of afternoons a week.

Is there anyone left that doesn’t lol, when they hear the name David Suzuki? Well, perhaps not Dr. Soon, and that’s understandable, but, Suzuki is simply the butt of climate jokes now.
Dr. Legates, I have sincere sympathy for the position researchers such as you are in. Scores of your “colleagues” have made a mockery of your profession. The once esteemed journals so eagerly succumbed to the influence are no longer regarded as outlets for legitimate scientific discourse. In fact, it is their advocacy that will lead to an entire reconsideration of what passes for valid science. Today, it seems like on a nearly daily basis, some peer-reviewed piece of ….. laughable facsimile of science gets published.
I believe it is past time to change the definition and procedure for what passes as science. The garbage that gets put out today isn’t worth reading. I used to like the challenge of picking a paper apart, now….. much of what we see today isn’t worth commentary. ———– “I saw floating dead polar bears!!!” ——— “A model told us the ocean is going to rise 30 feet!!!” ——- “Pollen will increase with CO2!!!!”——— “Forests cause GHGs!!!!”
Sorry for the cynicism, but I’m sure it can’t be any worse than what you see in your circles.
James

Rob R

The Suzuki-Gore tactic of demonising anyone with even tenuous links to the fossil fuel energy ha sbeen hugely successful. Basically it clears the field so that only one voice can be heard, and only one line of arguement can be published. Then they can say without contradiction that sceptics rarely publish anything substantive.
Unfortunately, as the majority of working scientists, engineers etc are employed in industry rather than in academia, the tactic Suzuki-Gore tactic has had the effect of drastically reducing the pool of talent from which useful research can be drawn. This is a shame as it appears that in the real commercial world the standard of scientific research is higher than it is in academia. Standards basically have to be higher outside academia because there is far greater accountability out there. Scientists working in industry have to meet a high standard of scholarship. They are accountable for the time they spend and for the money they spend. They also need to be as correct in their findings as possible because somebodies money (shareholders, company owners etc rather than the endless taxpayer pocket) is on the line. This extends to health and safety as well because the work they do may ultimately have consequences in terms of death or injury if not done to the highest standards. There is very little in the way of academic freedom to hide behind in the private sector.
In the private sector researchers need to perform. If they don’t then they will be looking for a new occupation. In academia the “publish or perish” system for job security and promotion does not inevitably lead to a quality product.
There are plenty of sharp minded scientists out there in the private sector. The expertise they represent is being squandered in relation to climate science at present. The research carried out in the private sector is generally cutting edge stuff, and typically just as complex as climate science. From a public interest perspective why wouldn’t we want to tap in to this resource. I think the answer is clear. The climate alarmism cult is frightened by the massive pool of talent available in the private sector, and will do anything to marginalise the ability of that sector to make a contribution to climate science.
Lets open up the door to competative tendering for a component of the climarte science research budget. If we do then within a few short years the quality and quantity of genuine science thart is published will increase markedly. New perspectives will emerge. Scrutiny will increase. Progress in the improved understanding of the climate will accelerate.
Thats my 2 cents worth for today.

Ted Swart

This seems like a watershed moment to me. We should do everything we possibly can to turn back Suzuki’s criticism of Soon. It is surely a case of enough is enough. At very least Suzuki’s attack on Soon highlights the fact that the CAGW supporters are indeed on the run. More power to your elbow Anthony.

MindBuilder

I think ad hominem attacks have a proper place in the climate debate. If the science was blatantly clear and easily replicable, then we could stick only with the hard evidence. But climate science is too complex for most of us to figure out who is telling the truth when the entire climate science community is defending the attempt to “hide the decline”. When it is so easy to insert a fudge factor into the evidence, or drop some contradictory evidence, those who bring the evidence have to have some credibility. Many people don’t believe in honesty any more than enough to fool people. There are scientists on both sides with this problem. Appeal to authority doesn’t settle an issue, but evidence supplied by scoundrels is not to be given much weight.

Latitude

Bystander says:
August 16, 2011 at 4:32 pm
Snort – you guys complaining about personal attacks on scientists.
Now that is ironic… Do y’all ever read what you write?
=============================================================
We do it all just for you………………………………….

Bill Illis

All Soon and Baliunas did was gather up hundreds of other peer-reviewed papers and collate it into a regional emphasis climate article that suggested there was indeed an Medieval Warm Period and a Little Ice Age. This caused the Team to almost have a coronary and they went “All In” to get it discredited.
To the Team, it was a “bad paper”, to quote Michael Mann. The hockey stick was, at the time, the “new” accepted wisdom and the paper called that into question. Boards were forced to resign. Soon and Baliunas were blackballed. Soon is still on the hitlist to this day.
But we now know that it was, in fact, a “good paper” because there really was a Medieval Warm Period and a Little Ice Age and the hockey stick was … well something else. Read the paper yourself and decide.
http://www.int-res.com/articles/cr2003/23/c023p089.pdf

David in Georiga

While all this finger pointing and name calling is interesting, it is not science. Good science and solid observations will carry the day, regardless of who calls names and who writes damaging emails. I would REALLY like it if WUWT would get out of the gossip business and get back to looking at the evidence.
If we need to look at anything, it’s what the real data says, and what our investigations tell us about the relationships between TSI, Solar magnetic flux, cosmic rays, cloud formations, ocean currents, Pacific and Atlantic oscillations, and greenhouse gases. We need to put our own peer reviewed science out there, if we have to start our own circle of Pal review and our own Journals to do it. As my friends across the pond would say, the truth will out.

MindBuilder says:
August 16, 2011 at 5:13 pm
I think ad hominem attacks have a proper place in the climate debate.
=====================================================
Ad hominem is a fallacious argument tactic by definition.
From Webster….. “appealing to feelings or prejudices rather than intellect. 2. : marked by or being an attack on an opponent’s character rather than by an answer to the …”
Mind, the problem with using prejudices is that they are often incorrect assumptions. For instance, many alarmists believe “Big Oil” is resistant to the climate change agenda. They are not. To them, this is an opportunity for larger profits. If all prejudices were correct, then ad hominem would have a place other than political rhetoric and gamesmanship, where winning is more important than doing good.

Dave Worley

First Gore, now Suzuki…surely more lemmings will follow.

At 4:32 PM on 16 August, Bystander writes:

Snort – you guys complaining about personal attacks on scientists.
Now that is ironic… Do y’all ever read what you write?

When has what’s been written on this Web site risen to the levels of libel and criminal fraud?
Loathe though I am to feed any starving lawyers, I’d think that Dr. Soon has a case for both compensatory and punitive damages against this Suzuki stronzo.
Be nice to see the allocation of that “$7 million every year” of Suzuki Foundation spending “on its ‘educational’ and pressure campaigns” turned over to Dr. Soon in perpetuity as funding for his research and the work of Dr. Soon’s associates in the skeptical examination of the preposterous bogosity of the AGW scam.

J. Felton

Bravo, Mr. Legard, for a rational account of then ” Climate Research ” resignations.
Unlike a certain ” Inconvenient ” has- been who makes his hypocrisy and corruption well known, David Suzuki has hid his biases a little better. He’s still as corrupt, and thanks for bringing this out into the open.

J. Felton

Ted Swart says
“This seems like a watershed moment to me. We should do everything we possibly can to turn back Suzuki’s criticism of Soon. It is surely a case of enough is enough. At very least Suzuki’s attack on Soon highlights the fact that the CAGW supporters are indeed on the run. More power to your elbow Anthony.”
* * *
Much agreed, but I’m just not sure what this would acomplish, as Suzuki has no intention of turning back from his propaganda, nor will admit he’s wrong. He is not a scientist in the slightest.
However, a link to this great article of WUWT left on his website might let him know that not everyone drinks his ” Green Kool-Aid.” ( Too paraphrase Steve McIntyre)

It gets better. Appearently someone in the media saw Suzuki and wanted to ask him some questions. She indicated she had written to him before with these questions. When he recalled who she was he told her to F-off. This is not hearsay, the woman was interviewed on Sun News today.

Darren Parker

I always laugh at how the warmists trolls like Bystander make a throwaway comment without any proof in the hope it will be accepted. Unfortunately for him , regular readers to this site know that we only play the ball , never the man. So go ahead Bystander, show just one single example of an ad hom attack. Just one. Should be easy shouldn’t it?

Robw

I completely agree with your position but I strongly suggest you refer to him as Dr. Suzuki. respect starts at home.

Ted Swart

Thanks J Felton. Your suggestion seems a good one. What about a mass campaign directed at Suzuki asking a simple question:
Why will you not debate Soon?
If enough people did that and it became known that they did that it might just cause Suzuki to bend. The debate would, of course, be lop sided since the evidence for AGW (which never really existed in the first place) is being eroded by the day.

FerdinandAkin


Bystander says:
August 16, 2011 at 4:32 pm
Snort – you guys complaining about personal attacks on scientists.
Now that is ironic… Do y’all ever read what you write?

Yes Bystander, we do read what is written here.
Snark is to the written word as the smell of victory in the morning air.

mike g

Where is this hypocritical moron’s outrage at the free pass the wind energy is getting to kill hundreds, perhaps thousands, of eagles per year? http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/08/16/energy-in-america-dead-birds-unintended-consequence-wind-power-development/

They are from potentially cooler global temperatures that could hamstring agriculture –

Indeed. As if on cue, Washington State governor, Christine Gregoire (D) is requesting federal disaster assistance for the entire state.
From the link:

“Everyone knows we’ve had lousy weather this spring and summer, but most of us don’t suffer serious economic consequences as a result,” said Gregoire. “Farmers across the state have watched their crops develop late or fail to thrive during this year’s cold and wet weather. This is the first time in recent memory we’ve requested that USDA determine the extent of agricultural disaster statewide. My request is the first step in the process that allows growers to access any disaster mitigation tools they may need.”

The last two years in Western Washington have been very cool year round. If this little dip is all it takes to warrant “disaster”, why on earth would environMENTALists want to return to CO2 levels, and presumably climate, of the Little Ice Age??

oops, I messed up the link somehow.
Here it is again: http://www.governor.wa.gov/news/news-view.asp?pressRelease=1755&newsType=1

I have been listening to David for more years then either of us choose to count. I do not fully understand what caused this fine scientific mind to become overly dramatic, more interested in entertainment then empirical accuracy and loose the scientific discipline and detachment of deductive reason for pseudo religion.

RockyRoad

Dr. Suzuki should be applauded and cheered for his anti-scientific, illogical and caustic behavior–It only proves “climsci” people like him have nothing substantive to their argument! They’re becoming more obvious in their loss as each day goes by.
Go, Dr. Suzuki, Go! Be obnoxious to the extreme! We “love” you for it!
(Gosh, I hope he stops by and reads this!)
And the person above that insists that Dr. Suzuki should be respected because he carries the title of “Doctor” should have their head examined. Truth trumps “Dr.” any day.

Dr A Burns

Dennis,
The reason couldn’t possibly be money could it ?

ferdberple

If Suzuki is so concerned about climate change, it seems strange that he would have so much invested in prime waterfront property in Vancouver. Surely Gore, Suzuki and Flannery would have sold their property and moved to higher ground if they thought the danger was real.
http://maps.google.ca/maps/place?cid=17409738348056910091&q=kits+yacht+club
Suzuki lives in the house right behind Kits yacht club. If you are looking for a great way to enjoy Vancouver, stop by the club and go for a sail or a paddle. Leave your navy blue blazer at home. Kits is jeans and T-shirts, having fun and getting out on the water. In the same location since 1934, a stone’s throw from the water, the clubhouse is still high and dry in spite of Hansen’s claims to the contrary. Sea level rise remains permanently 20 years in the future, no matter what the year.

David Davidovics

Its about time some one pushed back against this whack job. I’m canadian and have absolutely NO patience for Suzuki.

Paul Coppin

“Robw says:
August 16, 2011 at 6:31 pm
I completely agree with your position but I strongly suggest you refer to him as Dr. Suzuki. respect starts at home.”
I’m old enough to be a contemporary of Suzuki (and was, though not in the same schools). He walked away from his PhD the moment he graduated. There is nothing left to respect.

ferdberple

“Dennis Nikols, P. Geol. says:
August 16, 2011 at 6:40 pm
I have been listening to David for more years then either of us choose to count. I do not fully understand what caused this fine scientific mind to become overly dramatic”
How about “follow the money”?

Paul Coppin

As an addendum to my previous post, print convention today accords the title “Dr'” in print to Doctor’s of Medicine only. Other use is as a courtesy.

” CO2 is NOT changing climate. In the name of CO2 many are making. $$$ in Millions. By capturing conc: Deicers from Desalters 2*C can be very easily reduced. Welcome to visit Sarva Kala Vallabhan Group & Airconditioning of Mother Earth & comment “

David Walton

Re Anthony’s: The global warming scare has fizzled.
And under its own weight. But also with thanks to you any many others who respect the scientific method and ideal, Anthony.
God bless you and yours.

I happened to be driving through Vancouver….
… and making a left turn, I was suddenly confronted by a jaywalker!
I slam on my brakes…. stopped in time for the pedestrian who leaped over the front of my car with a push and a wave…
Ah…. Dr. Suzuki!… I waved back as he made a short run to the curb….
Yes, I thought the world would be a better place had I NOT hit the brakes….
But…
… with all his fallacies, irrational rhetoric, misguided understandings…
…the world still is a better place with him then without…

Toto

In case you want to read Suzuki’s comment, it is here:
http://www.davidsuzuki.org/blogs/science-matters/2011/07/investigation-hits-at-climate-change-deniers-science/
The last sentence is nice: “Let’s stop wasting our time on deniers. It would be better spent trying to resolve the serious problems we have created.”
Don’t expect Suzuki to debate on climate science; I suspect he doesn’t know any.

Robw says:
August 16, 2011 at 6:31 pm
I completely agree with your position but I strongly suggest you refer to him as Dr. Suzuki. respect starts at home.
=============================================================
Indeed. But if none is given…..none is received. I think many should no longer be given the respect usually afforded to people that believe it is an honor to spend much of their productive lives slurping on the backsides of other people that hold the same honor….. all the while pretending that they are learning something. There is a point one comes to, when they realize the best learning comes from doing and not talking. I’ve some dear family members with the title of Dr…….. I’ve done more.
You can call me Sexton or James, Mr. or dude or what ever. Respect is earned and not freely given…..staying in the comfort of an alma mater for as long as possible isn’t something to be particularly proud of……….. unless we’re going into the bottle vs breast conversation….

Fox news uses him as a scientific contributor and has featured him answering questions on everything from wind power to asteroids.

Dr A Burns

Suzuki is a geneticist. Soon is an astrophysicist. Soon seems much more qualified to discuss how our sun is the main driver for climate change.

JPeden

Bystander says:
August 16, 2011 at 4:32 pm
Snort – you guys complaining about personal attacks on scientists.
Now that is ironic… Do y’all ever read what you write?

Great move, Bystander, You’ve admitted the case that Soon was attacked personally by saying “and you’re one also”, but haven’t made any case whatsoever for your own claim!

Dr A Burns says:
August 16, 2011 at 7:38 pm
Suzuki is a geneticist. Soon is an astrophysicist. Soon seems much more qualified to discuss how our sun is the main driver for climate change.
==============================================
Suzuki knows we’re predisposed to be really bad for nature…………… See? What would Soon know about that? 🙂
Anyone lending Suzuki any credence is of the same ilk…….though, I believe it is nurture and not nature that causes such predisposition.