How ought one react and respond to lies

Perhaps this series of post will be therapeutic or perhaps even corrective.

Alas it is a distasteful task to do.

I have been called a lot of names by people and organizations who have an absolute and perfect lack of ethics. If they were politicians they’d be the dirtiest of that breed but few of my antagonists have the safe mantle of politicians. So here starts identification of the damned liars and referenced proof of their damnable lies. In no particular order to start.

Henry Fountain of the New York Times, now he is an especially pernicious and disgusting journalist who we must assume is not simply stupid and careless. In his article lambasting me for my work with the village of Old Massett he spins so many lies, damned lies at that, one is left knowing for certain he is a damned liar. Here’s  a start of what a scholar in Canada is working on to expose Mr. Fountain for his grossly erroneous and intentional misinformation piece in the New York Times.

The scholar writes:

On October 18, 2012, Henry Fountain published an article titled, “A Rogue Climate Experiment Outrages Scientists” in the New York Times Environment section. Given the number of factual errors and misrepresentations in the article, it is no surprise that the New York Times shut down the Environmental desk after this article was published.

The article contains so many errors of fact and misrepresentation, that it is impossible to discuss them all in one blog post. In this post, I discuss the confusing incongruity of statements about the science of the Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation, and attempt to set the record straight.

The Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation is a corporate entity set up by the people of Old Masset Village to implement ocean restoration projects to enhance ocean salmon habitat. The people of Old Masset Village hired Russ George to serve as their chief scientist on the project. A team comprised of people from Old Masset Village, Russ George, and other scientists worked for 6 years to investigate the foundational concepts, legal conditions, scientific theory and methodology, and data processing resources to support the implementation of the project.

Fountain writes that the activities of the Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation have outraged scientists, but in fact, it is the fictional narrative promulgated about the project by Jim Thomas of the ETC Group and Martin Lukacs of the Guardian that has caused the outrage, and so it should. If any of their statements were actually true, then the work of the people of Old Masset Village through the Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation could be seen as disreputable. Unfortunately, the outrage and condemnations are not based on the realities of the project.

The terms ‘rogue’ and ‘reckless’ are repeatedly used to describe the science that formed the underpinning for this project. However, the actual evidence, provided by the research team, belies these claims. In fact, it appears the science, supported by theoretical framework, methodological techniques and apparatus, and data, is worthy of respect and serious consideration. The HSRC provides detailed scientific information about the project here. Of course, any charges of rogue and reckless should rightfully be a reflection of those who use these terms. It is not customary for a scientific project to write up and publish their theory, method, data, findings, and conclusions before the project is completed. For those who somehow expected this kind of information to be available on demand is unfair and unrealistic.

Here’s a link to a scholarly review of him, his lies, damned lies, and the liar that makes him.