This whole uproar started with a post from Ash asking people to volunteer for some mysterious project he would not tell them about. I wrote to the OML telling them what the project was. The responses from Ash were nothing but insane ranting, threats, and incoherent insults. Ash is a member of the Weather Rangers and none of them reprimanded him or disavowed his uncivil behavior.
The Weather Rangers need to clean up their act in more ways than just the technical ones. To really be credible as a respectable group of serious people, they need a Code of Ethics, and some method of sanctions against members who violate it. That Code should include civil behavior expected from members in their interactions with the public.
It would be even better if they adopted the policy most organizations have of appointing one person as a spokesperson and having that person be the only one authorized to speak publicly for the group. Nearly every organization follows that procedure, and for very good reasons. It would avoid the problems caused by loose cannons like Ash taking it upon themselves to say whatever they feel like and the rest of the group being held responsible for it.
They should also have a firm policy of if they are willing to ignore environmental protection laws or not. In many places, weather modification is subject to various laws, including reporting to government agencies, making public announcements in advance, carrying insurance to compensate anyone whose property or livlihood is damaged by any weather changes resulting from an operation, and refraining from altering the habitat of an endangered species or a designated Wilderness Area.
If the Weather Rangers decide to ignore these laws, they should say so. If they do not intend to break laws, they should include that in their organization's Code of Ethics, and have a way to discipline members who break such laws. So far, the only statement on this topic from any of them is from Ash, who stated that he would ignore any environmental protection laws and decide for himself what to do to the weather regardless of any such laws. Is that the policy of the Weather Rangers? If not, they should say so. Otherwise, the inevitible impression is that Ash speaks for the group of which he is a member.
A large part of the conflict is a misunderstanding. Some people think I am speaking in the role of a "scientist". I am not. My role in this matter is as an environmental activist. And in that role it is my job to hold their feet to the fire and demand accountability. If you take a look at some websites devoted to environmental activism, such as those of Earth First!, Climate Ground Zero, or the Sea Shepherds, for example, you will see that my criticisms of the Weather Rangers fall well within the usual parameters of how environmetal activists write about companies that are trashing the earth.
And the fact that the Weather Rangers themselves think they are doing the world a favor does not change anything. The sort of people who want to control the weather are acting in an authoritarian manner, no matter what their rationalizations might be. Every corporate executive whose company is destroying the environment thinks he is "providing jobs" or "improving peoples standard of living" or has some other rationalization for what he is doing.
The Weather Rangers are new to this scene; the Reichians have been in it for 58 years now. And there is nothing new about control-freaks like the Weather Rangers getting involved in cloudbusting. It has happened before. And we have seen how it turns out.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.