Hoisted from comments -mt
If Peter Gleick was informally censured by AGU for lack of integrity in behavior not related to scientific research, what of Richard Lindzen and his science communications?
See today’s posting at RealClimate:
Misrepresentation from Lindzen
Richard Lindzen is a very special character in the climate debate – very smart, high profile, and with a solid background in atmospheric dynamics. He has, in times past, raised interesting critiques of the mainstream science. None of them, however, have stood the test of time – but exploring the issues was useful. More recently though, and especially in his more public outings, he spends most of his time misrepresenting the science and is a master at leading people to believe things that are not true without him ever saying them explicitly.
That’s Gavin Schmidt speaking, so just one person’s opinion quoted, but one apparently shared by many.
AGU’s “vision statement”:
AGU galvanizes a community of Earth and space scientists that collaboratively advances and communicates science and its power to ensure a sustainable future.
“Communicates science.” Is Lindzen upholding this vision, being a good Fellow of the AGU? Having made an example of Gleick, what would justify AGU in remaining silent about Lindzen? What’s the threshold for censure, on the continuum leading from private activities to representing the scientific community in an authoritative capacity?