Warmists have obsessed over something they like to call the Climate Change Denial Machine, a sinister cabal they blame for their failure to persuade people that a harmless trace gas essential to life on Earth is going to make the planet explode. Or something.
But, after extensive research The Daily Bayonet can reveal another reason for climate skeptic’s success and warmist failure.
It’s the songs, stupid.
Skeptics just have better minstrels. Compare and contrast two warmist efforts with a skeptic song, if you dare.
From the UK, The Sea Green Singers want to drown climate skeptics:
From Australia, Men With Day Jobs do the Denier Tango:
Cans of Coca-Cola are going from red to white as part of a new multimillion-dollar project promoting awareness about climate change and helping to protect an icon of the Canadian Arctic. The new design is part of the soft-drink maker’s new partnership with WWF, the conservation group also known as the World Wildlife Fund, to create “safe areas” for polar bear habitat in Canada and other Arctic nations.
It’s enough to make you all warm and fizzy.
But wait, what is the WWF, an environmental outfit, doing with an evil CO2-intensive industry like Big Soda?
The WWF should hang its panda-bear head in shame at its cozy relationship with planet-killer Coca-Cola, which pumps 99,280,000 tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere every year.
Unless of course CO2 is a harmless trace gas essential to life on Earth and global warming is just a huge scam. Big Coal should paint its product white and call the WWF, they’ll approve anything for a buck:
[Coca-Cola] will donate $2 million to WWF over five years as part of the partnership as well as matching as much as $1 million in donations from the public.
(h/t reader Heather for the soda causes violence link)
An enraged Rommulan threw a gray lady under a bus, hippies know BEST and eco-concierges are the latest accessory for the 1%, or something.
Part One: Hippie of the Week
This week’s Hippie of the Week is from Florida, the land of Disney and oranges, where he writes for the Miami Herald. Congratulations to Fred Grimm, who won for some climate fairy tales under a suitably scary headline:
Grimm is miffed because a new study by Florida Atlantic University predicted bad things for South Florida as a result of global warming and rising sea levels, yet no-one seemed to care. The reason for this lack of panic, in Grimm’s mind at least, is because of deniers.
Perhaps the most peculiar phenomenon associated with global warming has been a burgeoning disdain for climate science even as scientific consensus grows more urgent. Forget the stickier question of whether global warming has been fueled by human activity (as an overwhelming percentage of climate scientists believe), a poll by the Pew last year found that only 59 percent of Americans will even acknowledge the earth is warming, compared to 79 percent just five years ago.
Not just any deniers, mind, but pesky ‘far-right’ Conservatives, Republicans and Libertarians:
…another Pew poll this spring found 75 percent of far right conservatives, 63 percent of libertarians and 55 percent of self-described “Main Street” Republicans did not “believe” in global warming. The denial doctrine seems to have been embraced by the contenders for the Republican presidential nomination, with the exception of Jon Huntsman, as a rite of passage.
Grimm figures the repeated use of the term ‘scientific consensus’ means enough to make his naked alarmism credible. It doesn’t.
I think it is safe to cancel your subscriptions to the one-time paper of record. While there are 1 or 2 reporters at the New York Times who get climate and energy, it’s obvious that most don’t and, more importantly, the editorial staff simply don’t know what they’re doing.
When you’ve lost the New York Times, you’ve pretty well lost. Give it another year and Joe won’t have any friends left to toss under the bus.
…his disgust at seeing some environmentalists largely ignore the devastation from the recent Japanese tsunami while over-hyping the dangers of radiation from the stricken Fukushima nuclear power plant. “They believe in what they’re doing, but these people are nuts,” says Lynas. “And they’re doing real harm by spreading fear.”
“The problem with going green is that people think it takes so much work, so much effort, so much conscious decision-making,” said Letitia Burrell, president of Eco-Concierge NYC, a year-old business in Manhattan that tries to make it easy for people to rid their homes of toxins, hire sustainable-cuisine chefs and find organic dry cleaners. Memberships range from $175 a month to $3,500 a year, depending on the level of service. Or you can opt for à la carte service at $25 to $50 an hour.
It’s exactly like living in a yurt, but on the Upper West Side.
Greens are suffering some protest envy at all the attention Occupy Wall Street is getting.
Climate experts have figured out how to convince people that slightly milder weather they blame on a trace gas essential to life on Earth is a problem. Here’s a clue, it doesn’t involve more open science, less obfuscation and and fewer alarmists. It’s the branding, stupid.
Green on Blue fight – a Green Party presidential candidate wrassles Democrats for affiliation with the Occupy Wall Streeters. Next week’s news will be how fast the same groups can distance themselves from OWS.
…the electricity you use to power your home will increasingly come from solar panels. The conversion is starting with solar replacing the more expensive gas plants that turn on during peak summertime demand. Within a few years, solar could start to replace the 24/7 “base load” plants.
Al Gore praised a study that warmists are whopping ‘proves’ global warming is real. It was funded in part by Koch money and led by a scientist Joe Romm attacked for criticizing… Al Gore. So is Koch money now a good thing, or a bad thing in the minds of hippies?
The Berkeley Earth project compiled more than a billion temperature readings from weather stations around the world and found that the average global land temperature has risen by around 1C since the mid-1950s.
Nature magazine had some words about Muller’s abuse of the scientific process:
There was predictable grumbling at the media coverage from within the scientific community, which saw it as publicity in lieu of peer review. Reporters are more than happy to cover the story now, while it’s sexy, but will they cover it later, when the results are confirmed, adjusted or corrected in accordance with a thorough vetting? The short answer is no, many of them will not. Barring an extraordinary reversal of message, the wave of press coverage is likely to be only a ripple when the papers are finally published. And this is what upsets the purists: the communication of science in this case comes before the scientific process has run its course.
The most inconvenient truth is that while the BEST findings suggest the weather is getting slightly milder, it does not do anything to advance the suggestion that man has anything to do with it. Which is sort of the salient question, no?
…appeal is to the “consensual view among qualified scientists”. This is a category error, scientifically and philosophically. In fact, it is also a cop-out, a way of avoiding the basic issues. The basic issue is not whether the science is settled but whether the evidence and explanations are adequate in that paradigm.
I fear, too, that many politicians have never investigated the primary evidence.
Spain announced a 40% reduction in its wind power subsidy.
The European Commission’s energy department is questioning the wisdom of its go-it-alone global warming policies, citing loss of economic competitiveness.
The British government pulled the plug on its budget-bending carbon capture and storage facility. That’s where carbon dioxide from the combustion of coal is pulled out of the exhaust and sent back into the ocean floor. It sounds expensive and fanciful, and it is.
…not only should science be impartial and apolitical, it should be seen to be impartial and apolitical. There must be a level playing field and consistent standards applied to the involvement of advocacy and activist groups in scientific research. If it’s OK for WWF to be involved in the preparation of an alarmist report about Greenland ice sheets, it should also be OK for an oil company to assist with a report that challenges the consensus position.
Bad news for hippies and good news for people who like their energy abundant and affordable – fracking is safe.
Part Four: Global Hottie
Hola! The Erozone may be collapsing under the weight of its own stupid, but that doesn’t make the hotties any less, err, hot. El Spaniard Penelope Cruz has graced these pages before, so click your castanets and grab a tapas, here she is again:
“It stinks. I don’t think you could conceive a more elaborate way to disrespect not just the environmental community but also Occupy Wall Street, because this is simply a reminder of the way that corporate lobbyists dominate our politics. Forget ‘Hope and Change’–it’s like they want their new slogan to be ‘Business as Usual.’”
Weepy Bill is hoping that his planned November 6th protest in Washington will ‘somehow jog his [the President’s] memory’. I’m not entirely certain, but I think if Glenn Beck had said that, it’d be raaaaacist. Or something.
Here’s the obligatory Weepy Bill McKibben Google juice, brought to you by the lovely Angie Harmon:
The trial was conducted in seven African countries on two groups of children – newborns aged six-12 weeks – and babies aged five-17 months.
One year on, there were about half the number of cases of malaria in the older group of children given the vaccine, compared with those in a control group who received vaccines against other illnesses. “These data bring us to the cusp of having the world’s first malaria vaccine,” said Andrew Witty, chief executive of the British pharmaceutical company, GSK, which developed the vaccine alongside the non-profit PATH Malaria Vaccine Initiative.
Africa suffered from malaria long after the disease was eradicated in North America and Europe in large part because of misguided green ideology.
I imagine heads are exploding at the misanthropic Population Matters organization, because curing (or vaccinating away) malaria is not compatible with the green agenda.
“It is ludicrous to suggest that in seeking ensure that the observations of climate witnesses are consistent with the best scientific knowledge WWF is seeking to influence the IPCC,” said WWF’s International Climate and Energy initiative leader Samantha Smith.
“It is also ludicrous to suggest that IPCC reports are or could be influenced by the fact that some scientists have generously contributed some input to WWF’s climate witness scheme.”
Oh the ironing, Donna has made deniers of the WWF. Minx the Merciless will be pleased; when you’re taking heavy flak, you can be sure you’re over the target.
Also, like Gleick’s boomerang bad review, it’ll sell more books and further turn the work into an object worthy of mainstream media interest. My guess is that Ezra Levant will be all over Donna’s book like a fat kid on a Mars bar as soon as the print version is released.
Anthony Watts, of Watts Up With That, smelled a rat when he watched Al Gore’s Climate 101 video – it was part of the 24 Hours of Reality gong show. So Watts decided to replicate the experiment to see what results he would find.
Before we get to that however, let’s note a few important differences between science and ‘climate science’.
Read the whole thing, it’s a thorough effort to replicate the Gore video. For those pressed for time or wondering where the next hottie is, here’s the conclusion. Enjoy:
The experiment as presented by Al Gore and Bill Nye “the science guy” is a failure, and not representative of the greenhouse effect related to CO2 in our atmosphere. The video as presented, is not only faked in post production, the premise is also false and could never work with the equipment they demonstrated. Even with superior measurement equipment it doesn’t work, but more importantly, it couldn’t work as advertised.
The design failure was the glass cookie jar combined with infrared heat lamps.
Greenpeace is back on the water in a new luxury yacht, Occupy Wall Street may be an environmental hazard and will we finally discover the President’s Angry Birds high score?
Part One: Hippie of the Week
This week’s winner of the coveted HOTW award is the first to snatch victory for not one, but two distinct acts of hippiedom. Peter Gleick of the Pacific Institute has won for an article published in Forbes and for acting like a dolt on Amazon. Future contenders note, doubling down on stupid works.
First, the Forbes piece, which Gleick addresses to ‘the few’ climate deniers left:
OK, you have fought hard to deny or challenge the realities of climate change, perhaps because you are afraid of the policies that might have to be put in place; or are afraid of the possibilities of increased government intervention; or you don’t think it will be that bad; or you think it will be too expensive to do anything about; or you don’t understand the science; or you don’t trust scientists, including, by the way, every national academy of sciences and every professional scientific organization in the geosciences…
Gleick’s piece is mostly tongue-in-cheek about global warmingmaking chocolate extinct, or something, and Gleick loves him some candy. That and the CEO of the Pacific Institute hopes that scaring the sweet-toothed will help prop up the collapsing global warming industry.
Are you already convinced that climate change is false? Then you don’t need this book, since there is nothing new in it for you. If you respect science, then you ALSO don’t need this book, since there’s no science in it, and lots of pseudo-science and misrepresentations of science. See, especially, the section trying to discredit the “hockey stick” — long a bugaboo of the anti-climate change crowd. Seven independent scientific commissions and studies have separately verified it, but you won’t find out about that in this book.
Other reviewers note that you will find science in it, and lots of references to back up claims that the IPCC is hopelessly inept and corrupt.
Gleick must be surprised to see people push back on his nasty review, after all, that kind of thing never happens in the echo chamber of the global warming elite. The usual warmist MO is: 1)state your firm belief, 2) sneer and discredit opposing views, 3) profit.
Gleick didn’t need to read Laframboise’s work because he already had his mind made up. Just like he does with the science. Because the science is settled, and SHUT UP.
Part Two: Warmists & Alarmists
America’s green energy programs are collapsing at an astonishing rate, given that the present Administration is the smartest ever. But no matter how bad it was for Obama that Solyndra failed at a cost of half a billion dollars to taxpayers, it’s nothing compared to the cover-up. The White House has refused to hand over the Presidential Blackberry to see who knew what, when and how the President scores on Angry Birds.
In related events, it looks like the White House’s science adviser participated in a secret communication channel to the IPCC designed to avoid America FOIA laws:
The new IPCC system sought to shield U. S. government employees working on the Fifth Assessment Report from FOIA requests by hiding their correspondence, even though they are being tasked and paid by the federal government to work on the report. The scandal-plagued IPCC is funded with millions of U.S. taxpayer dollars. CEI demonstrates in its FOIA request that the IPCC’s motivation to avoid future FOIA requests was past embarrassment over releases of earlier communications between IPCC officials and participating bureaucrats, appointees and scientists working on the assessment reports.
Australian climate workers are getting the hang of how to have fun and profit from global warming. The head of CSIRO, the body that spends a lot of time analyzing climate data and issuing scary press releases, is also a director of a carbon sequestration business. Hippies point at any climate skeptic who so much as accepted a free mug from a gas station as proof that they are in the pocket of Big Oil, but there’s nothing to see here, move along.
The New York Times agonized over the question where did global warming go? Not literally, because there’s been precious little warming for about a decade and a half. The NYT means where did the feel-good issue of saving the planet go. Luboš Motl has a handy clue-bat to help out the Gray Lady:
There’s pretty much a consensus across the [Czech] political spectrum – and especially in the public – that global warming alarmism is a fashionable disease that plagues the brains of pampered and brainwashed people in the West who are either champions of a statist political ideology or their own profits, or those who want to be “hip”, who are naive and detached from reality, and who don’t understand how it easy it is to hijack a part of the scientific institutions and turn them into tools of shameless and cynical political propaganda.
Some in the media have tried to make global warming more topical by linking recent catastrophic disasters (such as floods and wildfires) to climate change. The challenge they face here may lie in doing so without editors’ and the public’s concluding that too is “old news.”
Global warmists often hold Malthusian views that the globe is overpopulated. The UK has both bases covered – save the planet, kill a senior.
Ecosalon has a list of the Top Ten global warming deniers. I’m not saying that warmists are getting desperate, but Michael Crichton has been dead for three years and still comes in at Number 6. What, the Koch Brothers were unavailable for the list?
…you need to understand a psychological process sometimes called “seizing and freezing.” Conservatives, who were losing the climate issue before “ClimateGate,” needed something—anything—to show them they weren’t all wrong about it, and that the fight wasn’t over. “ClimateGate” thus furnished the perfect rallying cry. Conservatives seized on the idea that this scandal proved, once and for all, that climate science was bunk—and they froze on this notion. Now, as a consequence, all you hear in Congress is about ClimateGate, and it is used as an excuse for complete dismissal of modern climate science knowledge, as well as the need for urgent action.
Kinda how Mooney seized on the notion that a trace gas essential to life on Earth was a great trojan horse for a socialist future and froze to the idea we wouldn’t figure out he’s a complete idiot. Or something.
Others have called the Tesla deal a form of “corporate welfare” for the president’s friends. There have been complaints from alternative energy companies that the ATVM loans were awarded because of political connections. DOE defends the Tesla loan, telling PJMedia it was sound and neutrally approved by its financial analysts. However, the DOE spokesman also acknowledged not knowing of the company’s plan for a $200 million NASDAQ IPO when it awarded the firm the loan. Nor did the spokesman say DOE knew Toyota was to become its partner in the plant when DOE issued the loan.
There is a general question of competence regarding the DOE loan staff’s ability to examine the 130 loan applications they received from high-tech firms.
“Scientists are more and more convinced of their results, but citizens are becoming increasingly saturated,” says climatologist Hans von Storch, director of the Institute for Coastal Research in Geesthacht near Hamburg. According to Storch, public concern over climate change has declined for the fourth year in a row. He also sees the apathy as a consequence of the increasingly shrill, alarmist tones with which environmentalists and even a few scientists have attracted attention to themselves in recent years.
Oh noes, the warmists were right – Gaia is getting hotter and glaciers are melting. Oh, wait, that was in 1906. The article didn’t link melting glaciers with the San Francisco earthquake because they hadn’t invented Al Gore yet.
Sea levels are not rising, and experts are upset with climate modellers claming otherwise:
Computer modelling by persons not having visited the sites in question is not good enough.
In the year 2000 we started an international sea level project in the Maldives where several distinguished experts took part,” he said, and he had been on six of those expeditions. “There is no ongoing rise in the sea level at all and since 1970, it fell by about 20 cm and has remained quite stable for the last 30 to 40 years.”
It’s the circle of life: global warming causes pine beetle outbreaks, which in turn cool the planet, saving it from future pine beetle outbreaks. It’s as if Gaia doesn’t need to be saved by hippies.
A reader noted that it’s been nearly three years since Kirsten Dunst graced a round-up, a shocking revelation. Dunst will always be welcome here, because she notably upset the French. That and she’s, well, a hottie.
The study says a typical Ontario household that now pays $1,700 a year for electricity will be paying $2,800 a year by 2015, compared with the government’s projection of $2,500. By 2030, Fox and Gallant estimate the yearly bill will rise to more than $4,100, compared with the government’s projection of $3,400.
The study says the government’s figures fail to include an allowance for inflation that are built into renewable energy contracts. The government projections also fail to include the cost of building back-up natural gas generators that are needed to fill in the gaps created by the variable nature of wind and solar power, the study says.
In other words, the government fudged the numbers to make the renewable option look affordable. Ontario’s energy ministry Brad Duguid rejects the study as flawed, but the researchers hit the Achille’s heel of Dalton McGuinty’s green energy future. It’s the math, stupid.
Ontario’s Liberals committed the province to pay up to 20 times the market rate for a KW/h in subsidies for solar and wind power. Add to that the cost of back-up generation they ‘forgot’ to include in their predictions and it’s easy to see why energy costs are set to skyrocket.
Industry will find it difficult to compete with such high electricity prices, which will almost certainly lead to job losses down the road. High energy costs will also mean missed investment opportunities as businesses skip the province in favor of low-cost, job-friendly areas.
But don’t expect the McGuinty government to change course. Even with a minority government, the little people are dismissed as a nuisance as Premier Dad chases the green dream:
A Liberal official dismissed Wind Concerns as a “bizarre little group” that joined forces with the Progressive Conservatives to campaign against the Liberals’ clean-energy policies. “They opposed the jobs and the cleaner air that we have been building in the growing clean energy economy,” the official said.
Ontario will be a clean economy of the future, but only because there won’t be any industry or jobs left to pollute anything.
Liberal Democrat environment spokesman Chris Huhne said: “The doubling of our electricity generation from wind in a little more than a year shows what renewables can do and gives the lie to the need for a new generation of nuclear power. “However, the incentives for wind need to be maintained while the Government is still far short of doing what is necessary to encourage tidal and wave power. “On a windy island surrounded by waves and tides, we should never be short of environmentally-friendly energy sources.”
Huhne expressed his excitement over the findings of a recent report into the value of Britain’s offshore resources. He is quoted saying: “It is right to point out, as that report did, that in due course we may once again be a net energy exporter, as we were during the peak of oil and gas in the North Sea, and that’s a very exciting prospect.”
The Government plans to spend more than £5billion laying 11 undersea power cables to allow Britain to import electricity from neighbouring countries and prevent blackouts in the next decade. The giant cables would provide up to 10GW of electricity, enough to power 2.4 million homes a year. Ministers are said to be alarmed at Britain’s likely energy shortfall, made worse by the fact the country has less capacity to import power than any other in Europe.
Chris Huhne scattered the land and oceans with anti-avian monuments to stupidity, and all he has to show for it is millions of dead birds and people who can’t afford electricity. Turns out the green dream is more of a nightmare for Britons.