Richard Littlemore

Primary tabs

Richard Littlemore's picture

Personal Information

Profile Info

Co-author (with Jim Hoggan) of the award-winning Climate Cover-up: The Crusade to Deny Global Warming, Richard has been Editor of the DeSmogBlog since its inception in 2005. Originally a newspaper reporter (the Ottawa Citizen, the Winnipeg Tribune, the Vancouver Sun), Richard has, since 1995, split his career between magazine journalism, activism and politics and corporate communications. On projects specific to climate change, he wrote the David Suzuki Foundation’s first public information package on global warming in 1996, was vice-chair of the Greater Vancouver Regional District's Air Quality Committee in 1996 and 1997 and sat as a delegate to the Canadian government's (failed) Kyoto Implementation Process from 1997 to 1999. Richard is a regular speech writer for many business and academic leaders.

"Sanctimonious Propaganda:" An Australian Expert Explains

Gotta love this attack by Australian climate change denier Bob Carter on Al Gore and his movie, An Inconvenient Truth, which, by Carter's account, is the biggest thing in Australia since Lord of the Rings.

You get a sense of Carter's direction in this fabulously overweaning second paragraph:
The Australian media - with Four Corners, the Andrew Denton Show and Phillip Adams in the vanguard - have fallen compliantly into Mr Gore’s sticky fly-trap, producing breathless hagiographies of a man and film whose message is rooted in junk science.

Inhofe Once Again Chooses Fiction over Science

Sarah just pointed me to this Jiminhotwater post reporting that the Chair of the Environment and Public Works Committee is once again calling as a witness someone who expertise leans strongly into PR and only weakly into science.

As per the comments on the weekend by Teresa Heinz Kerry, Jim Inhofe has been perverting the public conversation on climate change by inviting cranky deniers to testify at his committee while preventing the Democrats from inviting anyone at all. Inhofe's latest guest is “Skeptical Environmentalist” Bjorn Lomborg - a man whose record of scientific research in this field is worse than Tim Ball's.

Freelance "Expert" Bares a Scary Sense of Certainty

Roy M. Stanley, “a resident of Spotsylvania County,” wraps up a recent piece in the Free Lance-Star with this warning:

“Beware of blogs or professors with a political bias twisting, oversimplifying or misstating facts. Apparently these folks don't understand all they know, and they seem to reject any documented historical context that disagrees with their preconceived positions. You can't understand what is happening unless you understand what has happened in the past. You can't understand a complex problem like Global Warming with locally isolated environmental anecdotes.”

Intelligent Naval Gazing from the Daily Kos

Interesting commentary on why America is so out of step on climate change.

Denial Campaign Raging In UK, As Well

We'd been suffering under the apparent misapprehension that the UK media was relatively unburdened by a climate change denial campaign, but George Monbiot, in this Guardian column, suggests that the “debate” also rages fiercely in some of the UK's most prominent dailies.
Monbiot is also releasing a new book, including this nice explanation of the participation of tobacco peddlars, oil merchants and flexible “scientists” in creating confusion about scientific issues. Much of this material will be familiar to anyone who has read Ross Gelbspan's excellent books, or who has been reading the DeSmogBlog, but Monbiot is a clear thinker and a nice writer. His essay is definitely worth a look.

Corcoran Stumbles Onto Interesting Science; Emerges Unscathed

National Post's Terence CorcoranThanks to the National Post's Terence Corcoran for finding this story in the New Scientist magazine. It's an interesting report on new research into the role of the sun in global warming during the 20th century.

Corcoran's reportage, however, is another example of the lengths to which he will go to mislead people about the science of climate change.

Climate Change Denier Inhofe's Law of Impartiality

In a 2003 speech titled The Science of Climate Change, Senator James Inhofe, Chair of the Senate Committee on Public Works and the Environment, provided the following principles that he says guide his committee's attitude to climate change.

“That's why I established three guiding principles for all committee work:
  • it should rely on the most objective science;
  • it should consider costs on businesses and consumers;
  • and the bureaucracy should serve, not rule, the people.

Teresa Heinz Kerry: Another Controversial Commentator

There is no science debate (about climate change); there’s a science fiction debate.”

When the luncheon speaker at the 60th annual convention of the National Conference of Editorial Writers uttered that quote, an editor from Indianapolis (with whom I had been arguing earlier), leaned over with a sarcastic snarl and said: “And now you know it’s true because your heard it from Teresa Heinz Kerry.”

It points out, yet again, one of the central problems of the “debate” about climate change. The people who are most qualified to speak about the topic (scientists) are often the most reticent. They live in a different world. They speak through the careful publication of their research. And they guard their professional credibility by couching their conclusions in the myriad qualifiers that always apply. As a result, the science argument is seldom expressed with the kind of strident conviction and clarity that is – how shall we say? – optimum in trying to win over a confused public.

Tim Ball's Statement of Claim - A Public Document

Is attached for your interest.

National Conference of Editorial Writers: Split Decision

The notion that climate change is still debatable is alive and well among the continent's editorial writers.
The scientific community has long since arrived at the conclusion that:
  • greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels are causing global warming; and
  • this is an issue of urgent concern.
And a purely anecdotal majority of Editorial Page editors and writers attending the 60th annual convention of the National Conference of Editorial Writers (NCEW) in Pittsburgh on the weekend apeared to accept that position.