climate change denial

Slamming the Climate Skeptic Scam

Updated: June 15, 2009

There is a line between public relations and propaganda - or there should be. And there is a difference between using your skills, in good faith, to help rescue a battered reputation and using them to twist the truth - to sow confusion and doubt on an issue that is critical to human survival.

And it is infuriating - as a public relations professional - to watch my colleagues use their skills, their training and their considerable intellect to poison the international debate on climate change.

That's what is happening today, and I think it's a disgrace. On one hand, you have the Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change – as well as the science academies of every developed nation in the world – confirming that:

  • climate change is real;
  • it is caused by human activity; and
  • it is threatening the planet in ways we can only begin to imagine.

On the other hand, you have an ongoing public debate - not about how to respond, but about whether we should bother, about whether climate change is even a scientific certainty. While those who stand in denial of climate change have failed in the last 15 years to produce a single, peer-reviewed scientific journal article that challenges the theory and evidence of human-induced climate change, mainstream media was, until very recently, covering the story (in more than half the cases, according to the academic researchers Boykoff and Boykoff) by quoting one scientist talking about the risks and one purported expert saying that climate change was not happening – or might actually be a good thing.

The American Enterprise Institute: Still Peddling Lies, Lies and More Lies About Global Warming

At some level, it’s hard not to feel an ounce of sympathy for global warming skeptics. Surely it must take a lot of resolve and perseverance to keep pushing an idea that everyone else (presumably, they, too) knows is blatantly false. That is, until you actually start reading some of the material they try to pass off as sober-minded research.

What I find pathetic is not so much the content, which, as we all know, is easily disprovable, but the fact that their views have barely evolved over the years – even as the science has progressed and become less vague. A perfect example of this regressive mentality is a speech that was recently given by Kenneth P. Green, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI).

Tim Ball: Deceptions, Prevarications and Arguments with no Evidence

The following article, (with my own annotations in boldfaced italics), popped up last week on a right-wing website called HumanEvents .

Climate Change Denial - Breaking the Holocaust Link

There has been an increasing amount of coverage lately about the (anticipated) death of free speech - about the demonizing of people who deny climate change.

This is a dangerous and slightly desperate trend, because it tends to remove climate science from the climate change debate. It also preys on journalists' darkest fears: that the scourge of censorship, once unleashed, will invade every aspect of their practice.

The most recent outcry in defence of climate change denial arose when the prestigious UK science body, the Royal Society, made the unusual public gesture of demanding that ExxonMobil stop funding organizations that attack the climate change consensus.

Denying Climate Change; Urging Inaction

This is the text of a letter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper from 60 “accredited experts” who deny the reality of climate change. See the next post for additional information on the reliability of this group:

90 Canadian Climate Scientists Plead for Political Leadership

Ninety of Canada's most accomplished and reputable climate scientists have sent a letter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, pleading for sensible policy to address the impend threats of climate change.

Bringing Climate Censorship Home to Canada

 It appears that the Canadian government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper is joining the U.S. governmental campaign to stifle intelligent discussion about climate change. The  CBC story appended below describes Harper's government preventing a Canadian public servant from speaking about a novel that he wrote on his own time – about an issue on which he is an established expert.

Conservatives Snuffing out Canada's dim Light

A week ago, the Toronto Globe and Mail reported that the new Conservative government would not kill Canada's commitment to the Kyoto agreement (good news!), but had no intention of living up to it.

Lindzen in the Wall Street Journal: First notes of a swan song?

“The scientific community did not complain when Al Gore tried to [start] a witch hunt to discredit anti-alarmist scientists. They were mum when subsequent articles and books by Ross Gelbspan libelously labeled [skeptical] scientists …as stooges of the fossil-fuel industry….[and] when [a European skeptic] was tarred by Bert Bolin, first head of the IPCC, as a tool of the coal industry…”   

long-time climate skeptic Richard Lindzen in the op-ed page of the Wall Street Journal

Sixty Skeptics Find "observational evidence" Wanting

“Observational evidence does not support today's computerclimate models, so there is little reason to trust model predictions of the future,” write 60 climate skeptics, many of them bankrolled by the carbon industry.

(Oh. The glaciers are melting, the ice caps are dissolving, deep oceans are warming, violent weather is increasing and the timing of the seasons is changing – and it must be due to the fact that earth's temperature has flatlined! – RG) (Open Letter from 60 climate skeptics to Stephen Harper)

 

Pages

Subscribe to climate change denial