By Alan Tristram
Our ‘Biodiversity’ series has attracted some serious support and opposition.
The latest from ‘Sam’ says: ‘No wonder your webpage/”news” is independent as any reputable newspaper would not publish such blatant propaganda. I will not be reading any more of your stuff or recommending this to anyone.’
I disagree, Sam.Why? Because I think we go down a dangerous track when we make judgments like this.
Does suppression help?
Jim Hilton has the right to present his argument. If we suppress it, does that do any good?
(It would help incidentally Sam, if you attached your full name to comments. That way everyone is being truly open.)
The Biodiversity series has been critically examined by my associate editor, Roger Childs, who is a former senior secondary school teacher with immense knowledge and commonsense.
The series also comes with the backing of Leslie Clague, a former District Librarian and travel journalist, who is a highly intelligent person with fine critical judgement.
He’s not a conspiracy theorist
I don’t think any of us would claim to be expert scientists, nor do we need to be. And Jim Hilton is not a conspiracy theorist.
After all, I note, he presented his paper to the Nelson Science Society and presumably, as good scientists, they were happy to accept his credentials.
Sam, if you are as concerned as you say you are, why not write us an article and express your views, under your full name, and we’ll be happy to publish it.
Let free debate flourish and a hundred flowers bloom.