The deathless and - in many specific respects - completely fictional meanderings of Dr. Tim Ball have begun appearing again on right-wing blogs all over the net. At City Troll, at Convenient Untruth and at New Orleans Lady, the same tired and retreaded old climate rant paints Dr. Ball as the courageous victim of a plot to silence a well-meaning skeptic.
But Ball can’t even tell the truth about his own resume. His claim to be the first Climatology Ph.D. in Canada is a total falsehood; his degree was in historical geography - not climatology - and it was nowhere near the first ever granted to someone writing vaguely in the field. It also was granted by the university as a doctor of philosophy, not the more prestigious “doctor of science” that Ball claims in these articles.
“This is … a U.N.-backed body that quite frankly is an advocacy group for controls on carbon emissions,” said Tom Harris, executive director of the Natural Resources Stewardship Project, a leading clearinghouse for challenges to the science behind global warming. …
“There're over 10,000 reports that come out in any year on climate change … and this group doesn't represent at all that many of the leading scientists in the field. Our own scientists have raised questions about the data they've seen from the IPCC.”
Tom Harris, executive director, the Natural Resources Stewardship Project
The above quote, from the South Florida Sun-Sentinel, shows again the extremes that energy-industry funded public relations people will go to attack the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
But while the High Park execs have majority control over the NRSP, it appears that they don't have to report its operations as part of their lobbying or account for who's paying for the NRSP's operations.
“With the evolution of megacities, we now seem to feel that we are powerful enough to change the environment at our whim.”
Dr. Fred Michel in the National Post
The problem of climate change is not one of changing the environment “at our whim;” the problem is that we have been changing it inadvertently. Which means the question is not whether we are powerful enough to affect the environment around us…
Tom Harris, executive director and lead PR guy for the Natural Resources Stewardship Project (Not Really Science People), is being subjected to a liberal amount of piling on at BigCityLib, where they object to the notion that his organization is apolitical. The original BigCityLib posting is here .
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.