Democracy is utterly dependent upon an electorate that is accurately informed. In promoting climate change denial (and often denying their responsibility for doing so) industry has done more than endanger the environment. It has undermined democracy.
There is a vast difference between putting forth a point of view, honestly held, and intentionally sowing the seeds of confusion. Free speech does not include the right to deceive. Deception is not a point of view. And the right to disagree does not include a right to intentionally subvert the public awareness.
Although all public relations professionals are bound by a duty to not knowingly mislead the public, some have executed comprehensive campaigns of misinformation on behalf of industry clients on issues ranging from tobacco and asbestos to seat belts.
Lately, these fringe players have turned their efforts to creating confusion about climate change. This PR campaign could not be accomplished without the compliance of media as well as the assent and participation of leaders in government and business.
And Lorne Gunter strikes again in his vigorous fight with reality:
http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=2262365
Huh, reality is like cancer, isn't it.
Open letter to Lorne Gunter (in fact, he received his copy by email):
RE:
http://www.calgaryherald.com/technology/Good+climate+news+news+climate+alarmists/2259397/story.html
http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=2262365
Lorne,
I think you confuse the Hadley Met Office in Exeter, Devon (operated by the British government) with the CRU of the University of East Anglia in Norwich (operated by errr...you'll figure it out), and Hadley as part of Telford (half way up to Brenchley). All three are not only completely unrelated but it is quite a drive between them.
I wonder whether you are in for a libel suit by the British government. Or they get you for plagiarising your own work on two consecutive days.
You just created the geography scandal of the century, "Hadleygate", but it may only be a conspiracy. You can verify this by looking at their respective websites - do they really exist? Check their addresses but make sure Google Earth is not controlled by world socialism/the Friends of Science/the Teletubbies. Or simply click here:
http://img260.yfrog.com/i/hadleygate.jpg/
So, where are your leading sirens of the alarmist community located? Quite a drive required to find out!
Lorne, keep up your fine, heroic struggle with reality! And your rigorous, investigative journalism.
Regards,
Freiherr Baron von Monckhausen
Unqualified comment: my forefathers would call Gunter a "Schwachkopf"!
Heh, heh, heh! Nice.
Check the Calgary Herald website (letters section) tomorrow! A friend of mine has written something up there.
I hope Lorne replies to his email. I have already hired some Russian hackers to break into my server and post his correspondence here. Appears to be an acceptable practice these days!
Ahem, I also contacted the Hadley Centre and confronted them with Lorne Gunters allegations, emails had been stolen from their server. Would be outrageous if at least 6 major Canadian newspapers had to publish apologies to the British government. Very funny! The nail in the coffin of public deception! Or not!
Well, the Calgary Herald cut the good stuff out to to quite some extent:
http://www.calgaryherald.com/opinion/letters/Organ+recital/2268324/story.html
The Friends of Science are presenly getting ready writing a rebuttal of the above letter centring around something completely new: a newly discovered 10-year cooling trend. Yes, ever since they missed the train, it has been cooling in their opinion. What?
I have to point out the "Hadley" map again, linked to in the above comment:
http://img260.yfrog.com/i/hadleygate.jpg/
Strangely, when you connect the three locations by lines, it yields a symmetrical triangle, and all three angles coincidentally add up to 180º. And if you rotate the British isle clockwise around a vertical axis by ca. 30º, the base line of the triangle is approximately horizontal. This cannot be accidental and I am convinced it is part of Gunters' secret conspiracy aiming to put the nail in the climate alarmist movement. I will submit this image to Erich von Daniken for verification, asking whether aliens are involved, also.
Monbiot also says:
"But it is also true that the emails are very damaging."
"If you take the wording literally, in one case he (Phil Jones) appears to be suggesting that emails subject to a request be deleted, which means that he seems to be advocating potentially criminal activity. Even if no other message had been hacked, this would be sufficient to ensure his resignation as head of the unit."
i guess he is a respected journalist in your eyes then kevin.
Monbiot Excerpt: I have seldom felt so alone. Confronted with crisis, most of the environmentalists I know have gone into denial. The emails hacked from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia, they say, are a storm in a tea cup, no big deal, exaggerated out of all recognition. It is true that climate change deniers have made wild claims which the material can't possibly support (the end of global warming, the death of climate science). But it is also true that the emails are very damaging. The response of the greens and most of the scientists I know is profoundly ironic, as we spend so much of our time confronting other people's denial. Pretending that this isn't a real crisis isn't going to make it go away. Nor is an attempt to justify the emails with technicalities. We'll be able to get past this only by grasping reality, apologising where appropriate and demonstrating that it cannot happen again. [...]
One of the most damaging emails was sent by the head of the climatic research unit, Phil Jones. He wrote "I can't see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow - even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!" [...] Even so, his message looks awful. It gives the impression of confirming a potent meme circulated by those who campaign against taking action on climate change: that the IPCC process is biased. However good the detailed explanations may be, most people aren't going to follow or understand them. Jones's statement, on the other hand, is stark and easy to grasp. [...]
wow...from the marc marano of the alarmist camp
"One of the most damaging emails was sent by the head of the climatic research unit, Phil Jones. He wrote "I can't see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow - even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!" [...] Even so, his message looks awful. It gives the impression of confirming a potent meme circulated by those who campaign against taking action on climate change: that the IPCC process is biased. However good the detailed explanations may be, most people aren't going to follow or understand them. Jones's statement, on the other hand, is stark and easy to grasp. [...]
wow...from the marc marano of the alarmist camp"
I believe the papers being talked about DID appear in the IPCC report. Kind of deflates that argument don't you think?
I think the climate coverup was brilliant until the hackers bared the naked truth for all to see. Sure had a lot of us snowed and some still in the religion have yet to be deprogrammed.