cc: Asher Minns <A.Minns@uea.ac.uk>, John Shepherd <j.g.shepherd@soc.soton.ac.uk>, David Cromwell <ddc@soc.soton.ac.uk>, Peter Challenor <P.Challenor@soc.soton.ac.uk>, gschmidt@giss.nasa.gov, h.j.schellnhuber@uea.ac.uk, "B.E. Launder" <mcjtsbl@fs4.umist.ac.uk>, Mike Hulme <m.hulme@uea.ac.uk>, Katy Hill <klh@soc.soton.ac.uk>, "Quinn, Rachel" <Rachel.Quinn@royalsoc.ac.uk>, Laura Middleton <Laura.Middleton@uea.ac.uk>
date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 15:57:10 +0100
from: Stefan Rahmstorf <rahmstorf@pik-potsdam.de>
subject: Re: to engage or not
to: "Griggs, Dave" <dave.griggs@metoffice.com>

   Dear Dave,
   your comment about "skeptics" is of course correct - being skeptical is a scientific
   virtue, maybe even the essence of science.
   What we are really talking about is not skeptics, but deniers - people who are deliberately
   trying to mislead the public about global warming with pseudo-scientific arguments.
   Unfortunately the term "climate skeptics" is already established for these people.
   Attached is a nice cartoon from the Washington Post this week.
   Stefan
--
Stefan Rahmstorf
Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK)
For contact details, reprints, movies & general infos see:
[1]http://www.pik-potsdam.de/~stefan

   Embedded Content: WashPostCartoon.gif: 00000001,02ef452f,00000000,00000000

