In case anyone hadn't realised, I'm at the EGU. I doubt I'll be liveblogging, partly because there's no time and partly because the internet connection is overwhelmed by the number of attendees. There are brief reports on the Nature Climate Feedback which seem to be capturing the most newsworthy sciency bits. However there is no sign there of the biggest story which may be the apparent lurch towards scepticism in the higher echeons of the EGU council (I blogged earlier, but it now seems a little worse than I thought).
3 comments:
what do you mean by "worst than [you] though ?" something new happened ?
I don't have much new in the way of hard facts, being merely a humble scientist and blogger well outside the upper echelons of the EGU...but the Exxon thing seems increasingly fishy to me the more I hear about it. There seems to have been some very vigorous objections from a large (albeit minority) section of the council, and I was deeply unimpressed with the words of apologism offered by those in favour saying we should not hold Exxon's "past" against them, and instead work to change them from within (as if some newbie bench monkey is going to influence their corporate strategy or PR department). If there were a dozen major employers involved in this way, it would be another matter, but just Exxon alone sticks out like a sore thumb.
The other issue is the medal for Friis-Christensen...unfortunately I can't attend his medal lecture tomorrow (although TBH I expect he will talk about his real work not the climate stuff).
Other blogging:
Day by day, beginning:
http://www.easterbrook.ca/steve/?p=284
Meta-blogging the EGU
http://www.easterbrook.ca/steve/?p=304
But I really want to hear more from James, including about
> increasingly fishy
Your verification word for this was:
"Scheme"
Post a Comment