The carbon dioxide emissions from Ontario coal stations would be more costly to remove but are not something we should be concerned about since their contribution to global climate change is insignificant.
The self-styled Canadian climate change expert, Dr. Tim Ball, has abandoned his libel suit against University of Lethbridge Professor of Environmental Science Dan Johnson. Ball dropped the suit without conditions, but also without acknowledging that Johnson’s original comments were accurate and were reported in good faith.
The Natural Resources Stewardship Project condemned Prime Minister Stephen Harper today for Canada's “total capitulation to climate change dogma.” In doing so, Canada's leading group of climate quibblers appears to be separating itself from the last of its potential climate allies.
“NASA's top administrator, Michael Griffin, speaking on NPR radio made some refreshingly sensible comments about the present global warming scare,” said Robert Ferguson, Director of the Science and Public Policy Institute. “Many rationalist scientists agree with him, clearly demonstrating there is no scientific consensus on man-made, catastrophic global warming,” said Ferguson.
Hide your children: the dim bulbs at the Natural Resources Stewardship Project (NRSP) are warning that the federal ban on incandescent lightbulbs could soon give rise to a black market in inefficient lighting.
Imagine, Tim Ball and Tom Harris , decked out in bulky coats and lurking in the alleyways of Toronto and Victoria, offering addicts the opportunty to burn four to six times as much energy with a single lightbulb.
Ah well, when energy industry lobby firms run out of money to pay the NRSP principals to dissemble on climate change, at least the two spinmeisters have an exit strategy.
CNN shock jock Glenn Beck's “Climate of Fear” special was a miserable failure in the cable ratings.
It most likely tanked because it played host to the usual global warming denier gang, using the same laundry list of global warming denial talking points.
See below for the youtube version of Beck's denier-a-minute special broken into six parts – and check out the research we have compiled on some of the better known global warming dinosaurs Beck features.
Is it scientifically valid to attribute one instance of total failure by the global warming denier campaign to an emerging long-term global trend of failures by the global warming denier campaign?
Last week's Glenn Beck denier-a-minute special on climate change “alarmism” was a complete flop. The evening ratings are out and it shows Beck dead last in total viewers in the 7pm time slot. CNN can't be too happy, considering there was a considerable amount of hype-dollars invested in this attack on science.
I guess Tim Ball isn't the media darling the US think tank s have been making him out to be.
Dr. Eigil Friis-Christensen, Director of the Danish National Space Center, and Nathan Rive, a Research Fellow and the Center for International Climate and Environmental Research (CICERO) in Oslo, Norway, say the only way the program could have produced at least one of its graphs (inset) was by making up the data.
Rumour is that shock jock Glenn Beck will host the same old typical handful of global warming deniers on his CNN special tonight. They will no doubt spout the same old arguments like: “I remember when global cooling was all anyone would talk about.”
In what is becoming a perfect echo chamber, we see the same small group of mainly industry-funded “experts,” running from one ear to the next telling us that global warming is a hoax, and there is nothing to fear.
What this continuous recycling of the same 5 or 6 global warming deniers highlights more than anything is how very few there are left.
Here is the background on 3 of the known fossil fuel friendlies that will appear as “experts” on Beck's show. They are Tim Ball, Pat Michaels and CEI's Chris Horner.
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.