Denial Down Under With The Galileo Movement

Thu, 2011-08-04 11:20Graham Readfearn
Graham Readfearn's picture

Denial Down Under With The Galileo Movement

The Galileo Movement

THERE’S a new climate denial lobby group on the block - bravely regurgitating previously debunked pseudo-science and making wild unsubstantiated claims that climate scientists are all corrupt.

Not happy with misrepresenting the science on climate change, The Galileo Movement has also misappropriated the name of the father of modern science who was persecuted for his insistance that the Sun, rather than the Earth, was the centre of the universe.

The Galileo Movement, launched in Australia, has stated its prime mission is to stop the Government’s current efforts to introduce a price on greenhouse gas emissions and boasts a list of advisors resembling a who’s who of international climate change denial.

Included on the group’s advisory panel are Professor Fred Singer, Patrick Michaels, Professor Bob Carter, Professor Ian Plimer, Joe D’Aleo, Professor Richard Lindzen and Lord Christopher Monckton.

Galileo has been getting plenty of air-time and online exposure thanks to its patron, popular conservative radio host Alan Jones, and News Ltd blogger Andrew Bolt, who is also listed as an “advisor”. 

Jones, a fierce and fearless host on 2GB who leads radio ratings with his breakfast slot in Sydney, has been on a relentless tirade in recent weeks attacking climate science and the federal government’s plans to tax greenhouse gas emissions.

Since March, Jones has interviewed seven of the Galileo Movement’s advisors and the project’s coordinator. He’s interviewed Professor Carter twice and Lord Monckton three times. Both are advisors at the US-based climate denial “think-tank” the Science and Public Policy Institute (SPPI).

He’s also managed to squeeze in interviews with sceptics Lord Lawson, chairman of the Global Warming Policy Foundation, and Czech Republic President Vaclav Klaus.

During one slot, Jones claimed on-air that “human beings produce 0.001 per cent of the carbon dioxide in the air”, prompting an investigation by the Australian Communications and Media Authority

Yet Jones is also an outspoken critic of the massive expansions to coal mining and coal seam gas development in rural and remote regions of Australia.

Galileo has also brought in the services of JacksonWells, a Sydney-based public relations firm with a client list that you might describe as diverse.

As well as providing PR advice to international brands including computer firm Dell, Warner Bros. Entertainment, British American Tobacco and Imperial Tobacco, JacksonWells also has The Church of Scientology and the closed religious group The Exclusive Brethren on its books.

JacksonWells also lobbies government officials on behalf of many of its clients. The firm appears on the federal government lobby register and similar registers in the states of New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland and Western Australia.

Picking up the Galileo PR work is the well-travelled JacksonWells director Bob Lawrence, who also provided media advice and support to organisers of climate change denier Lord Monckton’s 2010 Australia-wide tour.

In an article last year in the JacksonWells company newsletter, The Well, Lawrence explained how he had helped to gain positive media coverage for Lord Monckton.

He wrote the firm had employees “who agree that climate change is a major global threat and we have our skeptics” but he added “the firm itself takes no corporate position on political issues”.

A political issue?

Disagreeing would be the world’s acidifying oceans, warming climate, changing atmospheric composition, melting Arctic and the vast majority of its working climate scientists.

Previous Comments

Years ago at Stevie Mac’s blog, I recommended that they do their own science and bypass the rigorous empirical-based science of the journals. I suggested they start their own journal entitled Galileo: The Journal of the NewScience and I offered to help them with graphics to kick it off.

Sadly, no one took me up on my offer, and now I see this NewDenialist group has stolen my idea! Grrrr! Who do I sue? Murdoch?

Best, D

Hi Dano

Unfortunately, the cart emerged before your horse- a coven of die hard geocentrists with a non-Poe website held a conference last year

http://www.galileowaswrong.com/galileowaswrong/

Speaking of alternative world views, what do you make of Oreskes & Conway’s take on yours truly?

I’m too jaded to revive Adamant in reply.

Talking about Alan Jones, it is good to see he is being investigated by the media authority over denier lies.

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/alan-jones-to-getup-get-stuffed-20110728-1i1r2.html

Should happen more.

The Galileo movement. Another mining & conservative front group.

Deniers & liars for hire.

And just watch them kick alarmist butt all over the place.

Glad to see it. Cheers

“And just watch them kick alarmist butt all over the place.

Glad to see it.”

Well, it’s funny you should say that Klem. Because one of your right wing mates I mention above, Alan Jones in a bit of cognitive dissonance has been speaking at anti coal seam gas rallies.

Jones, usually a fervent supporter of the mining industry & a patron of the galileo movement, finds himself on the same side as the greenies. How ironic.

http://www.2gb.com/index2.php?option=com_newsmanager&task=view&id=8738

Alan Jones quote : “A place where I grew up, being turned into a crater of the moon”

http://www.2gb.com/index.php/listenlive/images/stories/contactus/index2.php?option=com_newsmanager&task=view&id=7408

Ironic because he often talks about how useless it is to stop using fossil fuels & how much the greenies suck:

http://www.2gb.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=7712&Itemid=134

But also finds himself protesting against fossil fuels….ahaha. It’s ironic, because Jones has finally left the luxury of his inner city living & studio, to venture out & see the destruction from the fossil fuel industry……..Hopefully soon, he will develop the ability to look beyond the localized issues & see the planetary issues….which also affect local issues.

In the mean time Klem, as for your mate Andrew Bolt , who’s blog you like to frequent also. Gina Rhinehart ( Australia’s richest miner & part owner of channel 10 tv station) is watching as her right wing TV mouthpiece program “Bolt”, plummets in ratings.

http://blogs.crikey.com.au/purepoison/2011/08/03/lolbolt-quarantine-thread-august-3/comment-page-1/#comments

Bolt is almost last on the ratings, lol.

http://www.tvtonight.com.au/2011/08/week-32-4.html

Gina will be doing some sweet brown paper bag deals under the table to majority shareholders to keep that one afloat. Considering other shows that have far better ratings are axed in their 2nd week. Bolt’s despite paltry ratings has managed to stay there a couple of months.

In the meantime, Gina will be hoping her carpet bombing of channel 10 with ads from her mates in the mining council will be penetrating the public psyche.

http://www.youtube.com/ausminingstory

Con ads, to convince Australians of an alternative reality. Wonder if Gina will slip a paper bag under the table to Alan Jones to shut the hell up eh?

“In the mean time Klem, as for your mate Andrew Bolt , who’s blog you like to frequent also.”

Um, I don’t think I’ve ever been to Andrew Bolts blog, as far as I can recall. If there is another Klem out there impersonating me I’ll be very unhappy. Unhappy I say!

“Um, I don’t think I’ve ever been to Andrew Bolts blog, as far as I can recall. ”

Errr, well, Ive seen you posting on there a far back as 2009

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/new_consensus_no_proof_were_warming_the_world/P40/

You get to know peoples writing styles over the years & the difference between writers with the same names. Nope, I have it right. Thats you alright. Same as the various other news limted blogs, wuwt & other denier haunts.

Nice try.

I like this one on climate shifts last year where you straight out admitted, that it didn’t matter if denier science was wrong, you just had to win the voters minds.

“klem says:
February 24, 2010 at 2:05 pm

“Yet the science remains rock solid”

That may be true. But what counts is perception. Perception is reality, and when the public preceves that he science is bad, that’s all that matters. The public will determine policy based on preception so kiss AGW good bye baby! The skeptics have won. It’s over, go home.”

http://www.climateshifts.org/?p=4655

Deniers & liars for hire.

Hey yea you’re right! I guess I did visit Bolts site. I did not know that was Bolts site (actually I still do not know who Bolt is), but you are correct I visited that guys site back in 2009. Cool.

You know, I did not think I was ‘Klem’ that far back in time. I used to use my real name on the net until I realized that if the climate alarmists at my place of work found out that I was a skeptic, I’d get fired. This was a common occurrence to skeptics back in 2009 if you recall, it was not until Climategate happened that it was suddenly safe to be a skeptic. I still use ‘Klem’ however.

Thanks for this. Cheers.

He gets used by every fly-by-night science cowboy who thinks he/she is the loner with The Truth. “The Truth” is that it was not scientists who condemned Galileo, but the CHURCH. His crime was heresy, not against Science, but against the dogmatic grip that the Catholic Church kept on Christendom that put MAN (on earth) at the centre of the Universe. What Galileo threatened was not scientific at all. In fact he was supporting the science of no lesser fellows than Copernicus and Kepler, who had developed reliable models for the behaviour of a heliocentric system. He was WITH the scientific consensus, but AGAINST the received order of things within the church. Is this ringing any bells, folks?

Well, it is often said, The Devil quotes the Bible to his own device …”

Wow I love that quote, Ive never heard it before, where did that come from?

Did you guys ever read the IAC Report? Has some interesting recommendations for the IPCC and statements about the IPCC processes. Here are a few cherry picked ones taken out of context.

Having author teams with diverse viewpoints is the first step toward ensuring that a full range of thoughtful views are considered

However, authors reported high confidence in some statements for which there is little evidence.

The use of the level-of-understanding scale (Table 3.1), rather than the confidence scale (Table 3.2), would have made clear the weak evidentiary basis for these statements.”

However, the guidance was not consistently followed in the fourth assessment, leading to unnecessary errors. For example, authors reported high confidence in statements for which there is little evidence,

However, it is unclear whose judgments are reflected in the ratings that appear in the Fourth Assessment Report or how the judgments were determined.

The IPCC does not have a conflict-of-interest or disclosure policy for its senior leadership

The confidence scale should not be used to assign subjective probabilities to ill-defined outcomes.

The IPCC should establish a formal set of criteria and processes for selecting Coordinating Lead Authors and Lead Authors.

Scientists should not feel obligated to provide an assessment where no reliable information exists

The term of the IPCC Chair should be limited to the time frame of one assessment.

Any movement, scientific or other wise, that suggests/ demands that we need to revamp our economies/ way of living on a huge scale obviously needs to be investigated and held to account. AWG is such a movement, and needs to prove its point - no prevarications.
More power to the arm of the Galileo movement.

Its great to see the denialists finally getting organized and promoting their version of the truth. The alarmists have been doing this for years and are far better at it, back in 2007 - 2009 the alarmists owned the media regarding ACC and if it werent for Climategate they would have succeeded in putting the world into carbon slavery. This new group has probably taken the alarmist playbook and are employing their tactics.

Sounds good to me.

Thanks for the heads up. Cheers

On Andrew Bolts blog, which is ridiculously overrun by deniers, they credited the launch of this site and it’s choice of namesake, as Galileo was persecuted for going against the mainstream science and bringing the truth to light.
Now, let’s look at climate science history:
Originally it was an extreme view ony accepted by Green and environment groups. Slowly they have managed to bring this issue to the public eye, to the point it is economically and politically viable, not to mention scientifically correct.

The denialists claim that nothing is happening, we should stay the way we are.
To me it sounds like Galileo would definitely NOT be a climate change denier.
The science has gathered both evidence and support, much as Galileos work did.

The deniers on Andrew Bolts blog also claim that the conservative opposition (curiously named the Liberals) only have a climate change policy (with targets exactly as their political opponents) so they can get into power and then dismantle it. These are insane minds.

“To me it sounds like Galileo would definitely NOT be a climate change denier.”

Absolutly true, but Ill bet he would be an anthropogenic climate change denier.

No takers!!!

Do you deny the existence of the IAC Report. http://reviewipcc.interacademycouncil.net/

Do you deny its recommendations and statements, about AR4, covering political interference, conflict of interest, bias, uncertainty, management.

Do you deny that the IPCC itself commissioned the review?

Do you question the integrity of the review panel?

Do you deny that the IAC board is composed of the presidents of all the national academies of science?

Do you deny that the IAC had proper published review guidelines and conflict of interest guidelines?

Just as it took but a handful of reliable spokespersons to sustain the ” 1 dissenter means a TV debate” paradigm of the formative period of climate counter-advertising in America, Sydney and Perth’s coal-fired 21st century PR firms may be counseling their clients (very much the Down Under counterparts of the Calgary and Tulsa crowd) to subsidize the creation of a new generation of scientific point men, to deploy as the present generation of polemicists and arguments fades away.

What could be more natural than for them to focus their mentoring efforts on current loci of recruitment success- the same university departments that gave us such solons as Plimer.

The ideal candidate is a tenured academic of some administrative gravitas little creative potential, less to lose by way of current scientific fame, and much to gain in terms of nest-feathering from future consulting op-ed writing and book deals, especially in a market where political distribution can equal instant best-sellerdom even for pseudoscience pot boilers.

We are after all talking about Murdochland, where many former vestiges of intelligent conservatism, e.g. Quadrant, have been co-opted by Cuppateapartistas like Windschuttle, who, having given carte blanche to the likes of Plimer and Carter , will welcome the new cohort of mining-approved boffins aboard. Note that the prospective tax on two shiploads of coal equals ten Soon-years of grantsmanship. It’s too bad that Australia’s literally golden age of mining geophysics has fallen into a more lucrative black hole.

Is this your idea of truth???
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbOEUFKh-SU&feature=player_embedded

My present quest is to understand the science so I can make an informed decision. Therefore statements such as “previously debunked” are not helpful to me, at one level they represent a cause of my confusion, being a bare ipse dixit. Would it be possible to provide links to places/articles where the claims have been debunked?

“Would it be possible to provide links to places/articles where the claims have been debunked?”

Sure, here are 99% of them: http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

And the first entry merely asserts “humans are the dominant force” - so i click on that link and I get kindergarten condescension. What I need is the proof that humans are the dominant force not mere assertion. Where do I find that?

There is 2 explanations for each argument. Basic & Intermediate. You probabaly clicked on basic. Here is the intermediate explanation for that argument.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-change-little-ice-age-medieval-warm-period-intermediate.htm

If that stil doesnt satisfy you, you can always post a comment/question/argument & put it to the test. There is no expiration date on those arguments, they are perpetual. There are many working scientists on that blog.

If that is still not satisying you, then go to real climate or deltoid, where nearly all members are scientists.

http://www.realclimate.org/ http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/

I think fear is driving these people. They can’t face the reality of what they did to their grandchildren.

[x]

The Koch brothers have spent far more than even ExxonMobil to spread doubt and misinformation about the 97% scientific consensus on climate change in recent years — over $67 million on climate denial, in fact. Out of 13,950 peer-reviewed scientific journals, only 24 reject global warming. But the Kochs and...

read more