Gawker’s Nick Denton considers himself a climate change ‘sceptic’

Gawker founder Nick Denton counts himself among Brits who are “sceptical” — that’s British for “skeptical” — of a consensus on climate change.

The Daily Caller noticed Monday that Denton had twittered a link to a climate change article by Matt Ridley (published last week in the Spectator, a conservative British magazine), but without the usual critical caveat that readers have come to expect from the gossip mogul: “How cranky bloggers are puncturing the consensus on climate change. by Matt Ridley http://j.mp/cIQbOE.”

Our curiosity piqued, we emailed Denton and asked if there was anything behind his decision to post Ridley’s story besides the desire to disseminate the news.

“Ha, you picked up on that,” Denton wrote back. “I’m a natural sceptic and I respect those who don’t simply defer to expert consensus. There was much the same level of agreement about the Soviet threat, the abolition of the economic cycle, acid rain and the inexorable economic rise of Japan, to name just a few.”

According to a February BBC poll, Denton joins an increasing number of British people in questioning the science behind climate change. Twenty-five percent of poll respondents doubt that global warming is real, up from 15 percent in November 2009. According to another February poll, conducted by Populus for the Times of London, 38 percent of respondents said that “climate change is happening but not yet proven to be largely man-made,” up from 32 percent in Nov. 2009.

While a series of high profile stories revealing errors committed by the IPCC have been published since November 2009, Michael Simmonds, managing director of Populus, told the BBC that “73% of the people who said that they were aware of the ‘science flaws’ stories stated that the media coverage had not changed their views” on global warming.

“More people are now doubters than firm believers.”

Contact Mike Riggs at mike@dailycaller.com

  • immortalityltd

    Is global warming (or its new moniker “climate change”) really happening? If so, are we causing it?

    Those are the wrong questions, as they are irrelevant to whether we should act or not. The questions we need to ask are:

    1. What will happen if we don’t do something and man-made global warming is really happening?
    2. What will happen if we don’t do something and global warming is real, but not man-made?
    3. What will happen if we don’t do something and global warming isn’t real?
    4. What will happen if we do something and global warming isn’t real?
    5. What will happen if we do something and global warming is real, but not man-made?
    6. What will happen if we do something and man-made global warming is real?

    Those answers can be found here: http://bit.ly/9N6VqE

  • Pingback: Global warming skeptics increase ranks in wake of IPCC reports | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment

  • tadcf

    What does it mean for Nick Denton—whatever his credentials may be–to say he’s a ‘sceptic’ towards theories of climate change?  Does he mean “it’s all a bunch of bunk?”  Or does it mean that he believes some of it, but not all?   But, of course, his is a safe view—vague and ambiguous.

    In the article, by Mike Riggs, seems to base a lot of what he says on a link to an article by Mike Riddley, [http://www.spectator.co.uk/spectator/thisweek/5749853/the-global-warming-guerrillas.thtml ], which makes the ‘acid  rain’ concept seem like a hoax.  But, acid rain was not a hoax!  [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid_rain]
    In fact, there was legislation enacted to prevent the effects of acid rain–which were clearly manifesting themselves. 

    Now some of the effects of acid rain may have been exaggerated, just like some speculation by certain scientists about Climate Change might be wrong–as attested a recent article by Kerry Emanuel, director of the Program in Atmospheres, Oceans, and Climate at Massachusetts Institute of Technology. http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2010/02/15/climate_changes_are_proven_fact/

    It is important for cautious journalists to investigate all these issues and point out possible incongruous occurrences.  Then, science should turn its attention to the subject, and resolve it.   But, journalist should not have the last word on science, and effectively discredit it on the basis of their impression of the facts–and possibly persuading the population to believe something that is counter factual and not in their best interests.   And, it’s imperative that the reading population itself needs to become better informed, in order that either side have undo influence.  Science, the ball’s in your court. 


  • Pingback: Companies back out of climate group as skepticism grows | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Bill-Moffatt/1263244665 Bill Moffatt

    I dunno, sounds like a major tool to me! Lots of hot air.


  • Pingback: Remainders: Wuerker wins!

  • billbrady

    If you own shares in Johnnie or Cutty…………….sell, sell, sell…. The ice will be gone in a couple years and we’re all doomed. Invest in hops. Warm beer is a real food.

  • Facebook User

    the brilliant and snarky response from Denton’s own Gawker: Typos Don’t Make Climate Change a Myth – Global Warming – Gawker http://ow.ly/183wo

    • ignatiusreilly

      Well done.

    • des1

      True, typos don’t make GW a myth…..it’s the scientists who’ve lied and the politicians & businessmen who’ve attempted to cash in that make it a myth.

      Or you could just say it’s the facts that make it a myth.