Climate Denial Crock of the Week - The "Temp leads Carbon" Crock
The following is reprinted here with the consent of the author, George
Monbiot. There is much more on his website about climate and a great many
other topics. He does seem to be one of the thinkers of our times.
The link below will take you to his site. This article on his website
includes many references which are well worth looking at. I have not included
them here because of gigabyte constraints.
Tell people something they know already and they will
thank you for it.
Tell them something new and they will hate you for it. ~George Monbiot
The Real Climate Censorship Posted April 10,
It’s happening, it’s systematic, and it is precisely the opposite story to
the one the papers are telling.
By George Monbiot. Published in the Guardian, 10th April 2007.
The drafting of reports by the
world’s pre-eminent group of climate scientists is an odd process. For many
months scientists contributing to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
tussle over the evidence. Nothing gets published unless it achieves consensus.
This means that the panel’s reports are extremely conservative – even timid. It
also means that they are as trustworthy as a scientific document can be.
Then, when all is settled among the scientists, the politicians sweep in and
seek to excise from the summaries anything which threatens their interests.
While the US government has traditionally been the scientists’ chief opponent,
this time the assault was led by Saudi Arabia, supported by China and
The scientists fight back, but they always have to make some concessions. The
report released on Friday, for example, was shorn of the warning that “North
America is expected to experience locally severe economic damage, plus
substantial ecosystem, social and cultural disruption from climate change
related events”(3). David Wasdell, an accredited reviewer for the panel, claims
that the summary of the science the IPCC published in February was purged of
most of its references to “positive feedbacks”: climate change accelerating
This is the opposite of the story endlessly repeated in the right-wing press:
that the IPCC, in collusion with governments, is conspiring to exaggerate the
science. No one explains why governments should seek to amplify their own
failures. In the wacky world of the climate conspiracists, no explanations are
required. The world’s most conservative scientific body has somehow been
transformed into a cabal of screaming demagogues.
This is just one aspect of a story which is endlessly told the wrong way around.
In the Sunday Telegraph, the Daily Mail, in columns by Dominic Lawson, Tom Utley
and Janet Daley the allegation is constantly repeated that climate scientists
and environmentalists are trying to “shut down debate”. Those who say that
manmade global warming is not taking place, they claim, are being censored.
Something is missing from their accusations: a single valid example. The closest
any of them have been able to get is two letters sent – by the Royal Society and
by the US senators Jay Rockefeller and Olympia Snowe – to that delicate flower
ExxonMobil, asking that it cease funding lobbyists who deliberately distort
climate science(5,6). These correspondents had no power to enforce their wishes.
They were merely urging Exxon to change its practices. If everyone who urges is
a censor, then the comment pages of the newspapers must be closed in the name of
In an interview four weeks ago, Martin Durkin, who made Channel 4’s film The
Great Global Warming Swindle, claimed that he was subject to “invisible
censorship”(7). He appears to have forgotten that he had just been given 90
minutes of prime time television to expound his theory that climate change is a
great green conspiracy. So what did this censorship amount to? Complaints about
one of his programmes had been upheld by the Independent Television Commission.
It found that “the views of the four complainants, as made clear to the
interviewer, had been distorted by selective editing” and that they had been
“misled as to the content and purpose of the programmes when they agreed to take
part.”(8) This, apparently, makes him a martyr.
If you want to know what real censorship looks like, let me show you what has
been happening on the other side of the fence. Scientists whose research
demonstrates that climate change is taking place have been repeatedly threatened
and silenced and their findings edited or suppressed.
The Union of Concerned Scientists found that 58% of the 279 climate scientists
working at federal agencies in the US who responded to its survey reported that
they had experienced one of the following constraints. 1. “Pressure to eliminate
the words ‘climate change,’ ‘global warming’, or other similar terms” from their
communications. 2. Editing of scientific reports by their superiors which
“changed the meaning of scientific findings”. 3. Statements by officials at
their agencies which misrepresented their findings. 4. “The disappearance or
unusual delay of websites, reports, or other science-based materials relating to
climate”. 5. “New or unusual administrative requirements that impair
climate-related work”. 6. “Situations in which scientists have actively objected
to, resigned from, or removed themselves from a project because of pressure to
change scientific findings.” They reported 435 incidents of political
interference over the past five years(9).
In 2003, the White House gutted the climate change section of a report by the
Environmental Protection Agency(10). It deleted references to studies showing
that global warming is caused by manmade emissions. It added a reference to a
study partly funded by the American Petroleum Institute, which suggested that
temperatures are not rising. Eventually the agency decided to drop the section
After Thomas Knutson at the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) published a paper in 2004 linking rising emissions with
more intense tropical cyclones, he was blocked by his superiors from speaking to
the media. He agreed to one request to appear on MSNBC, but a public affairs
officer at NOAA rang the station to tell the programme that Knutson was “too
tired” to conduct the interview. The official explained to him that the “White
House said no”. All media inquiries were to be routed instead to a scientist who
believed there was no connection between global warming and hurricanes(11).
Last year the top climate scientist at NASA, James Hansen, reported that his
bosses were trying to censor his lectures, papers and web postings. He was told
by public relations officials at the agency that there would be “dire
consequences” if he continued to call for rapid reductions in greenhouse
Last month, the Alaskan branch of the US Fish and Wildlife Service told its
scientists that anyone travelling to the Arctic must understand “the
administration’s position on climate change, polar bears, and sea ice and will
not be speaking on or responding to these issues.”(13)
At hearings in the US Congress three weeks ago, Philip Cooney, a former aide to
White House who was previously working at the American Petroleum Institute,
admitted he had made hundreds of changes to government reports about climate
change on behalf of the Bush administration(14). Though he is not a scientist,
he had struck out evidence that glaciers were retreating and inserted phrases
suggesting that there was serious scientific doubt about global warming(15).
The guardians of free speech in Britain aren’t above attempting a little
suppression, either. The Guardian and I have now received several letters from
the climate sceptic Viscount Monckton, threatening us with libel proceedings
after I challenged his claims about climate science(16,17,18,19). On two of
these occasions he has demanded that articles are removed from the internet.
Monckton is the man who wrote to Senators Rockefeller and Snowe, claiming that
their letter to ExxonMobil offends the corporation’s “right of free speech”(20).
After Martin Durkin’s film was broadcast, one of the scientists it featured,
Professor Carl Wunsch, complained that his views on climate change had been
misrepresented. Wunsch says he has now received a legal letter from Durkin’s
production company, Wag TV, threatening to sue him for defamation unless he
agrees to make a public statement that he was neither misrepresented nor
Would it be terribly impolite to suggest that when those who deny that climate
change is happening complain of censorship, a certain amount of projection is
Climate change in North America: Heat waves, storm
UNITED NATIONS -- Severe storm surges could hit New York and Boston.
Chicago and Los Angeles will likely face increasing heat waves. And cities
that rely on melting snow for water may run into serious shortages.
These are some of the findings about North America in a report by hundreds
of scientists that tries to explain how global warming is changing life on
According to the panel, global warming is already having an effect on daily
life but when the Earth gets a few degrees hotter, the current inconvenience
could give way to danger and even death.
The panel says Boston's transportation network may be at risk from a sea
level rise and the increased probability of a powerful storm surge.
Near the end of the 21st century, under a strong warming scenario, the New
York City area could be hit by increasingly damaging floods from surges.
(Copyright 2007 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)
New York, very close to my home, "rely on melting snow for water ",
that's us alright. ~Stuey
Now. If you do want to do something or at least
think you may need to, to save your own donkey, then click on the
'what to do'
page below and/or go to the 'links page' to learn more. I
apologize to my farming community for a total lack of help to you, as I
only have gardening experience, not farming.
Endangered species, caged in fright
Shot in cold blood, no chance to fight
The stage is set, now pay the price
An ego boost, don't think twice
Technology, the battle's unfair
You pull the hammer without a care
Squeeze the trigger that makes you Man
Pseudo-safari, the hunt is canned...
The hunt is canned
All are gone, all but one
No contest, nowhere to run
No more left, only one
This is it, this is the Countdown to Extinction
Tell the truth, you wouldn't dare
The skin and trophy, oh so rare
Silence speaks louder than words
Ignore the guilt, and take your turn
Liars anagram is "lairs"
Man you were never even there
Killed a few feet from the cages
Point blank, you're so courageous...
One hour from now,
another species of life form
will disappear off the face of the planet
forever...and the rate is accelerating
Megadeth - Countdown to extinction
Breaks over; back to the salt mine. Let's talk
Migration: Pretty word,
migration, reminds me of the geese flying south in the fall, with the
hummingbirds hitching rides on their backs, the Monarch butterfly making the
same trip on it's own, and the many other species that go south every fall and
arrive back in the spring. Well, last fall some of the geese were flying
north in the fall. Why? Guess they got confused.
The thing is that as the US, our southern neighbour gets hotter many of the
US varmints will find living close to the equator too hot. They
will want (or have) to move north. Since they have bigger sticks than we do, and
even though we can't feed them all, we will let them in. To begin with it
could mean a real-estate boon. I think I might sell if some guy offered me
2.5 billion for my 8 acres. Of course I'd have to think about it.
Thing is he might just shoot me. I guess what I'm trying to say here is that
it's not just the pathogens and diseases that will want to move to Canada or
It will be all sorts of people from all around the planet. Net result?
Over population, and everybody bites it. Those of you southerners who can
learn to cope in the hotter climate may be the only winners.
The whole problem in a nutshell. There are too damn many of us.
Sadly, the idea of not having children just doesn't fly with 90% of the
population (Gay's, the other 10%, are exempted, They're doing their part.).
China has been way ahead on the birth control thing for a long time but our
whole economic system is based on growth and to grow it needs more people.
Many European countries are suffering population declines.
Suffering because their economies also depend on growth. Africa is resolving
population growth in a most horrific manner, HIV/AIDS. We are contributing to the
number one cause of climatic change in the most pleasurable way we know.
The crazy thing about this is that having children kills children. What
can I say? I'm not so sure that my great grand children, if they survive,
are going to look back on their great grandfather with any kind of respect.
If I were them, I'd want to kill me. There are those who will say that
the world can feed many more people. Ask them to explain why 1000's of
children starve to death every day.
Let's take a break here.
Don't know about you, but
all this doom and gloom gets to me.
In recent news reports the following story has been unfolding. This guy
is not an Al Gore fan and he does like to shoot the messenger. Personally,
I believe his wrath should be directed at his fellow scientists, not Al Gore.
The following is an excerpt from the media.
Over the past 24 years, Gray, 77, has become known as
America's most reliable hurricane forecaster; recently, his mentee, Philip
Klotzbach, has begun doing the bulk of the forecasting work.
Gray's statements came the same day the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change approved a report that concludes the world will face
dire consequences to food and water supplies, along with increased flooding and
other dramatic weather events, unless nations adapt to climate change.
Rather than global warming, Gray believes a recent uptick in
strong hurricanes is part of a multi-decade trend of alternating busy and slow
periods related to ocean circulation patterns. Contrary to mainstream thinking,
Gray believes ocean temperatures are going to drop in the next five to 10 years.
Gore's documentary, An
Inconvenient Truth, has helped fuel media attention
on global warming.
Kerry Emanuel, an MIT professor who had feuded with Gray over
global warming, said Gray has wrongly "dug (his) heels in" even though there is
ample evidence that the world is getting hotter.
OK. Let's give him the benefit. Let's just say it was not our,
...oops, I meant your fault. Does that actually mean that we can
forget about it? I'm thinkin' that how it came about may be a red herring.
I hate herring of any colour.
GLOBAL WARMING? CLIMATE CHANGE?
Now that the credible scientific community has finally
reached a general agreement that climate change is upon us and that we have,
most likely, contributed to the cause we must each respond in our own way.
I, personally, have been trying to make a minimal effect on our environment
by conserving and recycling for over 30 years, but this is not the only way.
I suppose that I should apologize for this effort because I realize now that
environmentalists are really bad people. I'm not going to apologize, I'm
just recognizing that, perhaps, I should. My way assumes that one
accepts the science as true. The trouble is that in so doing I am
accepting responsibility for climate change or global warming and for
resultant limited life spans of future species including my children's and
A much better way to deal with the whole
problem might be to deny the science. To say that, even though these
thousands of professionals have spent much of their lives studying the
worlds ecosystems and weather patterns, and geology, and, and, and,
must be wrong. Now this approach is much more helpful. Firstly and most
importantly it relieves me completely of any responsibility. I can say "Of
course I care about my children's future" while still driving that big ol'
gas guzzler or crank up the thermostat when it gets chilly outside and even
suck up all the juice I can from those coal fired generators to run my
antiquated air conditioner when it gets to warm. No need to feel any guilt
at all. Heh! What can I say? Denial is the perfect solution to the whole
thingy. Global Warming is just another of those scare tactics to give us
something to take our minds off the fact that we're so pampered we actually
have virtually nothing to do. So don't loose your
over global warming like I've done. Big mistake. Who
really gives a damn about his children's future anyway. Once we're gone it's
their problem to deal with. And if your kids actually have the unmitigated
nerve to question what your doing just tell 'em
"Shut the eff up"
Not happening? Better rethink this. Watch out for the
A recent film broadcast in the UK called "The Great Global Warming
Swindle" is edited to give the impression that global warming is a
hoax. In that film one scientist says that the increases in climate
temperature cannot be measured accurately due to the cities.
cities create their own weather and temperature conditions and this is
offered as some sort of proof that global warming is not created by mankind.
Well there you go. Global warming is created by the cities. Not
by mankind. Boy, I thought all along it was caused by you,
I'm so sorry.
The buildings are a little tall in the picture at
but the scale of the whole picture shows the size of the city (40 miles
wide) relative to the height of the atmosphere (10 miles high) above it.
Of course most of the gases from the city spread around that 10 mile high
atmosphere so we can all share in their aroma.
From news stories about the most recent IPCC report:
“The worst stuff is not going to happen because we can't be that stupid,”
said Harvard University oceanographer James McCarthy, who was a top author
of the 2001 version of this report. “Not that I think the projections aren't
that good, but because we can't be that stupid.”
I guess the scientists can get it wrong sometimes. The worst is going to
happen because mankind is that stupid. If we were intelligent we wouldn't
have gotten into this mess in the first place? ~Stuey
Nearly 30 per cent of all species are estimated to be "at high risk of
irreversible extinction" if average temperatures rise more than 1.5-2.5C, as
predicted by the end of the century.
Damage to Earth's weather systems from greenhouse gases will change
rainfall patterns, punch up the power of storms and boost the risk of
drought, flooding and stress on water supplies, the IPCC said.
I'm wondering if I'm a member of the 30% club, ~Stuey
At US insistence, (IPCC) drafters dumped a paragraph that said North
America was "expected to experience severe local economic damage and
substantial ecosystem, social and cultural disruption," delegates said
In God we trust, sure can't trust our governments.
Wonder how they intend to keep this one a secret. ~Stuey
A little warmer is a good thing?Another story we get is the popular idea that a
little warmer is a good thing for those of us living north of the equator.
It will mean longer growing seasons and increased crops for our farmers.
I, myself, certainly enjoy the warmer winter. Unfortunately, we are already seeing
some of the bad side of this in British Columbia, Canada where
the pine beetle is no
longer being killed off by the cold winters and millions of hectares of pine
trees are being destroyed. (1 hectare = 2.47105381 acres) Since trees are one of the main
against warming their loss will snowball climate change conditions.
Where I live the local farms may well have increased growing seasons but
they may also have much more volatile weather conditions. We
have tornados and hurricanes which have been extremely rare in the past.
A proud standing field of corn, the preferred crop, will be reduced to
nothing in a few hours. Of course with the warm temperatures come the
corn borers and the
locusts and grasshoppers and a host of
other never seen here before, pests will move north from our southern
neighbour the United States. Nor will our animals be left out of this
calamity. Our farms for the most part are dairy farms specializing in
Holstein cattle. The diseases and sicknesses that afflict these cattle
will be more virulent and new problems will arise. In some cases whole herds
will have to be put down. .
Imported food is another problem. We
will no longer be able to safely import foods. For two reasons.
Firstly, the risk of disease, and secondly, the destruction of the source of
these foods. Already many vineyards, banana trees, coffee plantations,
maize farms, citrus trees, and potato crops have been destroyed due to
increasing storm and seismic activity. This destruction will continue
and the inhabitants of these countries, man and beast, will need everything
they produce for themselves and in some cases they will need to import our
food. (If we have enough)
Volatility of the weather is another climate
change concern. We are already seeing much more rapid swings in our
weather. The Weather Channel and The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation
(CBC) are the main sources of weather forecasting for our area. It is
only within the last decade that is was possible for them to forecast the
weather for our region for a week or more in advance. Now we are lucky
if they get it right for the next day or two. Every morning when I
check the forecast it has changed from the previous night. Not really
a problem for old farts like me who just sit around the house all day and
pass wind. But if a man is on the land every day or out building a new
edifice then the forecast is very important. If he decides to cut the
hay when he sees the weather is sunny and warm, and half way through the wind
comes up hard and blows all the fresh cut hay into the tree line he may just
be a little frustrated. Maybe even angry. The builder stands up a new wall and pins it
with a couple of boards only to have a gust of wind take it over to the edge of
the yard and neatly pile it there. All of this will come to pass, and a
great deal more. These are only little examples of what to expect.
Put your cap on and you will be able to come up with many more related to
your own field of endeavour.
Volatility is not just about daily
weather . It also relates to seasonal change. One summer may
start as a terrific planting season with moist ground and warm days and so
the crops are sown. This is followed by a month or two of daily
downpours that drop 5 cm of rain daily and cause flooding and washouts and
the seeds either rot in the ground or are washed of the land along with much
of the topsoil. Next we get hot hot days in which anything that did
survive the monsoon like conditions is dried out and scorched by the sun.
The possibility of wild fires is very real. Of course the following
year may start with cold cold weather only to be followed by either rains or
heat. Many combinations are possible but we can count on them from now
on. So how does a farmer know what to plant? I would suggest
food rather than cattle corn with a major herd reduction and a more local farming
Heat! Although this is really
about weather it deserves special mention. This is the one that kills,
not just people but crops and cattle and almost everything but pathogens.
It is especially of concern to the very old, the very young, and to the
farming community. My great grandchildren and I have a heat problem.
As mentioned in a page about hydro the chances of our grid system carrying
the load with 10's of 1000's of air conditioners running full out while
the sun is beating down and the thermometer is pushing 40 degrees centigrade
(The US has already experienced temperatures at 126 deg. F breaking all
previous records and thousands died in 2006) is not very likely
and if we do run it at peak we will need all the coal generation we have
available which will make the situation irretrievable. The sun will
show it's ugly side killing not just we varmints, but our animals, including
pets, our crops, and all but the pathogens who seem to love that heat.
The words "Your Toast"will
have real meaning. You will need to know how to keep cool without
hydro. No not a generator 'cause that creates CO2. I have a
few solutions and you will need one too.
High temperatures beat lows - Gerald Meehl (NCAR) on Current & Future
Where's the missing heat? Kevin Trenberth (NCAR) on solar energy & climate
Four Hot Questions about Climate Change (audio)
UCAR: What Are the Likely Impacts of Global Warming?
UCAR: What is Causing Global Warming?
The YouTube videos below are a sampling of UCAR & NCAR presentations that are
designed to help the layperson understand both the science of climate
change and how the deniers deliberately pervert the science.
Is Denial, The Only Way Forward?
Sometimes when trying to regurgitate something that you've only half
digested, it can be very difficult to maintain an orderly flow. But
I'll do my best.