Uppdatering: Här är vad en annan kvinnlig klimatskeptiker, Joanne Nova, anser om saken. (Joanne har skrivit detta i ett email till mig och gett mig tillåtelse att citera henne.) Joanne driver den utmärkta bloggen JoNova.
Why are there so few women as visible sceptics?
The bullying and intimidation launched at sceptics is so vitriolic it’s not surprising that most women stay silent. Speaking your mind is a high risk venture – you risk your reputation and status – and it’s an aggressive environment. You need a very thick skin.
Those who claim there is an alarming crisis are aggressively rude. I get anonymous emails claiming they ”know” I’m funded by Exxon (I’m not), telling me I believe smoking doesn’t give you cancer, hacking my credentials, and inventing reasons why I write what I write. They make up lies about me. They never apologise. When you show they are wrong and explain the science, they never say thanks.
Paid attack sites like DeSmogblog are set up with funded public relations experts to smear anyone who speaks out. They are so desperate, they smear me for work I did with the government 15 years ago in a touring science program sponsored by Shell. At the time I was a member of the Greens political party, but they don’t mention that.
If there was a debate with good manners and less mud-slinging, we’d see more women speak up.
Calling people ”climate criminals”, ”deniers”, ”delayers”, ”conspiracy theorists”, ”paid hacks”, and ”inactivists”: It’s all anti-science. It’s an ad hominem attack.
Those who claim they have thousand of references, don’t provide one, instead, because it’s based on a bluff, they attack the questioner.
Not many women want to be thrown into that Lion’s Den.
A lot of the blog wars is a testosterone point scoring game. It’s not about figuring out whether the planet will warm, it’s about scoring points in a mental rugby match where there are no gentlemen.