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.

Climate Science Debater to Have His Day in Court

Per this Globe and Mail story,Tim Ball has filed suit against the Calgary Herald and University of Lethbridge Professor Dan Johnson.
As a sign of respect for the court process and the individuals involved, the DeSmogBlog plans no comment on this story until a Statement of Defence is filed.

Climate Science to Have its Day in Court

A blue ribbon group of U.S. climate scientists have filed an action with the U.S. Supreme Court, arguing that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has “mischaracterized” the evidence of climate change and is thereby avoiding its responsibility to pass appropriate regulation.
You can read the whole brief, attached (which we highly recommend), but the following will give you a sense of where the case is going:

“As practicing scientists who study the earth’s climate
system, we and many in our profession have long
understood that continued human-caused emission of

Conservative CO2 Policy: Better than Lip-Service?

It's hard to credibly criticize the bankrupt climate change policy of the Canadian Conservative administration when people insist on drawing comparisons to the Tories' Liberal predecessors.
As the National Post points out today, the bleakness of the Liberal record belies completely the passion of the Liberal rhetoric. It was only after Prime Minister Chretien had deflected and delayed action for almost a decade - only when he began to think of his political legacy - that he suddenly caught the Kyoto spirit. In the meantime, Canada's greenhouse gas emissions had risen unforgivably and Canada's credibility on the world stage was in relative tatters*.

Bravo Evironment Canada

Yesterday, we became aware of an uprising in the scientific community - specifically a complaint about an outrageous bit of misinformation that had been lodged on an Environment Canada Global Warming website.

I appears that the senior bureaucrat/scientist responsible for the site was just as alarmed as we were about this and immediately ripped the information off-line.

Canadian Pollution Regulation Likely a CO2 Abdication

This kite in the National Post  today suggests that the Conservative government of Stephen Harper plans to introduce a “made in Canada” Kyoto plan that has almost nothing to do with CO2.
According to the Post story - no doubt leaked to the Tories favourite paper so they could test public reaction - the new legislation will get tough on the air pollution elements that make Toronto smoggy, and at times dangerous.
But the Post reports that “while the government will be clear about its goals for air pollution, it is likely to be more nuanced on its plans for climate change.

New Canadian Climate Policy to Be Built on a Lie

With stunning disregard for a decade's worth of scientific research in the area of climate change, Environment Canada has added this paragraph to their public discussion of the Greenhouse Effect:

“There is a great deal of uncertainty associated with climate predictions and, although temperature changes during this century are consistent with global warming predictions, they remain within the range of natural variability.”

Uncertainty is a reliable feature of climate science, but the statement that temperature changes during this century “remain within the range of natural variability” is decidedly and verfiably false. This represents a flagrant misrepresentation and politicization of science.

The Union of Concerned Scientists addresses the question thusly:

The Role of Natural Variability

"Climate Change - It's the Apocalypse, Stupid"

This short essay by Australian Jesuit scholar Mark Byne is a little hyperbolic - a little apocalyptic - but worth it for the headline alone.

Tim Ball on the "Arrogance" of Friends of Science

Just a little confused“One of the things that angers me are these groups like Friends of Science. Now think of the arrogance of the title of that. Basically, what they are saying is that if you're not in our group, you're not a friend of science, or Friend of the Earth I should say. Sorry, the Friends of the Earth.” - Dr. Tim Ball, Senior Scientific Advisor for the Friends of Science

Margaret Wente's Climate Conversion: From Denial to Despair

Globe and Mail columnist Margaret Wente, who was still contesting the science of climate change as recently as last December, has become a convert.

In her column today (we regret that the Globe finds her prose too precious to share online) she begins by saying:

“Last week a clear-headed woman (Frances Cairncross, president of the British Association for the Advancement of Science) got up and said in public what no politician, not even Stephen Harper, is brave enough to say.

Tim Ball Completes Transition to Politician

Finally, Tim Ball has found a room in which he is unquestionably qualified to speak: On Friday, Sept. 22, Canada's foremost climate change denier will be the main course at a Conservative Party of Canada “breakfast event” in Victoria, B.C.
The invitation heralds “Dr Timothy Ball Ph.D.” the second reference to his strained academic credential apparently being there in case you missed the implication of the first.
Whether Dr. Ball was ever justified in passing himself off as a senior climate scientist (as opposed to a junior geographical historian) is a topic of justifiable debate, but there is no question that since his retirement 10 years ago, he has committed no act of science worth recording in a reputable scientific journal. It's also true that he has spent much of the last year as a pretty-much full-time campaigner against  the recognition of climate change as a matter of urgent public interest.

Pages