Lorne Gunter: Incompetent or Lying? Either Way, Worth Firing

Fri, 2008-07-25 15:06Richard Littlemore
Richard Littlemore's picture

Lorne Gunter: Incompetent or Lying? Either Way, Worth Firing

An earlier post of the errors/misrepresentations in a recent Lorne Gunter column in the National Post has attracted a host of comments and a few that further debunk Gunter’s passionately inaccurate talking points.

DeSmog reader Dave Clark, for example, offers this:

Yet another whopper from Gunter:

“Snow coverage in North America this winter was greater than at any time in recorded history.”

In fact, (according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) the 2008 January coverage at 17.0 million square kilometers was identical to the average for that month from 1973-2008. Years having equal or greater January snow coverage include every year from 1974-1985, except the marginally lower years of 1976 and 1980.

An earlier post of the errors/misrepresentations in a recent Lorne Gunter column in the National Post has attracted a host of comments and a few that further debunk Gunter’s passionately inaccurate talking points.

DeSmog reader Dave Clark, for example, offers this:

Yet another whopper from Gunter:

“Snow coverage in North America this winter was greater than at any time in recorded history.”

In fact, (according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) the 2008 January coverage at 17.0 million square kilometers was identical to the average for that month from 1973-2008. Years having equal or greater January snow coverage include every year from 1974-1985, except the marginally lower years of 1976 and 1980.

So, Gunter says that Al Gore is “calling on his country to abandon all fossil fuels within 10 years.”

That’s not true. Gore challenged the U.S.to commit to producing 100 percent of our electricity from renewable energy and truly clean carbon-free sources within 10 years.

Gunter says that “worldwide, there are nearly half as many glaciers advancing as retreating.”

That’s not true. Gunter’s own reference source says, “Climate change is causing roughly 90% of the world’s mountain glaciers to shrink.”

Gunter says, “Greenland isn’t melting.”

That’s not true. This NASA report - the most recent available - shows “that 2007 marked an overall rise in the melting trend over the entire Greenland ice sheet and, remarkably, melting in high-altitude areas was greater than ever at 150 percent more than average.”

Gunter says, “Snow coverage in North America this winter was greater than at any time in recorded history.”

Per the comment and impeccable scientific source above: THAT’S NOT TRUE.

More than 50 per cent of Canadians believe that there is still a legitimate scientific debate about whether human activities are causing climate change. That’s not true and hasn’t been for a long time, but you can hardly blame Canadians for being confused; when journalists (and journals) of record have this much contempt for science, truth and their unsuspecting readers, it’s completely to be expected.

Somebody should sack this character and should start insisting that his paper (and all the papers in the CanWest Global conglomerate) carry stories that are, well, true from now on. 


For more on the who’s who of the climate denial industry, check out our comprehensive climate deniers research database.

 

Previous Comments

“Here’s some good news for anyone sick of being force-fed a relentless diet of pernicious environmentalist hogwash: Last week, The New York Times noted that the advertising industry is pulling back from green-themed marketing, having “grasped the public’s growing skepticism over ads with environmental messages.”

Just like the pet rock and parachute pants, going green will be gone before you know it; once another “new and exciting” way for corporations to squeeze your wallets dry to fill their own!

comes along

The complete opposite of what that guy (robby) said.

Awesome post, Jon. Why not come up with something really brilliant and original, along the lines of “Robby’s mama wears army boots”?

You may be overoptimistic, Robby. AGW is almost a dead issue in the scientific community where only “saving face” by the likes of Hansen and Mann keep it alive but, venal politicians and the media, a couple of years behind the parade as usual, will keep it alive for years - because it has developed into a glorius public milch cow.

Hoggan’s harlots on DeSmog will continue to fulminate for as many years as dirty money continues to flow from Lefebvre and the Suzuki Foundation.

Same old boring diatribe Zog - take a look in the mirror.

??????????????????????????

And your point is?

Why are most of the warmist posters at this site (Kevin’s sock puppets excepted) so abysmally dense and inarticulate? I hope that it isn’t genetic or that, if it is, they don’t breed.

What kind of name is Zog anyways - how stupid (abysmally dense and inarticulate) is that?

Ah, Richard. Such venom. Could it be that you’re a tad envious of Gunter, a successful journalist, whereas you’ve been reduced to an attack dog for a cheezy PR firm financed by an international scam artist? Naw, couldn’t be that.

Zog, are you saying that Gunter is reporting information accurately?

Have you references to demonstrate that what he is saying is actually true?

You may well imagine me weeping in jealously at Gunter’s most wonderful “success,” as a “journalist” (boo, boo hoo); but my point - rendered venomously or otherwise - is that the guy is either incompetent or a liar. I have provided examples and references to support that position.

Have you ANYTHING to say that is relevant to that point? Anything at all?

Gunter

Great words from Peter Huber.

“So does the climate computer have a real audience, or is it really just another bag lady muttering away to herself in a lonely corner of the intellectual park? That the computer is heard in Hollywood, Stockholm, Brussels and even some parts of Washington is quite beside the point–they have far less global power and influence than they vainly imagine. Vinod Dar is right: “Contingency planning should entail strategic responses to a warming globe, a cooling globe and a globe whose climate reverberates with laughter at human hubris.”

Trying to think of an instance where ZOG, Gary, or Rob wrote something that led to discussion. I don’t think there has been such a watershed moment. Instead, they post vitriol that leads to interminable flame wars.

There is no point in engaging these guys. Their purpose is to raise your blood pressure and responding just makes them happy because they can then insult you again. Why bother?

JTK

Perhaps you should review the posts again.
The insults were just about all from Ian and other AGW advocates.
Getting Insulted by VJ is now a status simble.

Look again.

You have worked diligently to earn the active, almost convulsive, dislike of nearly everyone. Well done! And farewell.

JTK

I’ll admit to being somewhat pedantic about spelling, but I think the attention to detail that someone brings when presenting individual words can be used as another legitimate way of measuring that person’s credibility - or the complete lack thereof. 

Cheers!

JTK

Thanks for directing me to Gunter’s column. It’s a good read.

Richard, Gunter didn’t claim snowfall for January was a record - he said “this winter” which is correct - you know, November to April. “In recorded history” was a stretch and should have read, “since records have been kept” i.e. since 1973. A blooper, but hardly a hanging offense.

I’ll take your word that what Gore really said was “to commit to producing 100 percent of our electricity from renewable energy and truly clean carbon-free sources within 10 years” since that is sufficiently goofy to warrant commital to an institution.

Your other points - glaciers advancing and retreating etc. are subjects of debate and dispute. Neither you nor Gunter is an expert, and either can accept whichever “authorities” you wish without being branded a bad journalist.

Pages