- from David Bellamy
- and John Boehner and the GoP
- and the Cato Institute
- about Swanson and Tsonis
- about CO2
- about Al Gore and sea level
BONUS: Debates V
A quick round up of some of the recent climate change Denier memes, frauds and lies:
from David Bellamy
Our old friend David Bellamy is at it again, and has been thoroughly vivesected by George Monbiot with “Bellamy the Bearded Bungler doesn’t disappoint.” As stated in my earlier post on Bellamy, it a sad end for what was otherwise an honourable career.
from John Boehner and the GoP
No longer able to actively suppress climate science, the Republicans have to make do with simply lying about it. In an attempt to prevent any actual action of any form on climate issues the Republicans have been misrepresenting the work of John Reilly of MIT.
Time for the media to call conservatives out for repeatedly exaggerating and distorting the work of MIT — and the cost of climate action in general, which is “one tenth of a penny on the dollar.” In fact, MIT found the costs on lower and middle income households can be “completely offset by returning allowance revenue to these households.”
You have to give it to John Boehner when it comes to looking out for his own interests. That would be $188,700 worth of interests in the form of campaign donations from coal, oil and gas lobbyists in 2008.
It’s easy to tell when Boehner is lying. His lips move. If this is the best that the Republican Party can do, then they’re in for a very long time in the wilderness.
This is a deliberate lie.
They seem to be getting this number from an intentional misinterpretation of a 2007 study performed by a group of researchers at the MIT.
In an interview with PolitiFact, John Reilly, an MIT professor and one of the authors of the study, explained about this $3,100 claim:
“It’s just wrong. It’s wrong in so many ways it’s hard to begin.”” […]
and the Cato Institute
The industry PR firm posing as think tank known as the Cato Institute (aka front for Patrick Michaels) recently published ads in newspapers. The ads are a petition to the President, signed by a hundred scientists, which calls the reality of anthropogenic climate change into question.
RealClimate’s With all due respect… discusses how none of the science that this PR campaign references actually says what they claim it does (what? Deniers misrepresent and lie?)
Not only doesn’t support their stance, but as Climate Progress points out New study quoted by Cato Institute deniers concludes “warming over the 21st century may well be larger than that predicted by the current generation of models.”
Rabett Run looks at the credentials of some of the signatories in Resume Stretching The Oregone Institute, as does the International Journal of Inactivism in And now, the Orgone Petition, Capital Climate in With All Due Respect and George Monbiot with Climate change deniers: the usual suspects with no credibility.
EconoSpeak: Annals of the Economically Incorrect has issues with the economic claims being made Misleading Cato Petition Ad On Climate.
One of the more curious posts I found was Why I didn’t sign the CATO Institute ad by William M. Briggs. Some of you will recognize Briggs as one of the Morano cabal as describe in REVEALED: Marc Morano’s Pack Of Climate Denial Jokers. Have a look and see what a dyed in the wool Denier sees as wrong with this scam.
Apparently the Cato Institute has defended the effort, see I hereby propose the William Happer Award for Best Mixed Analogies
A little background on the Cato Institute
“Bigger in size than either Microsoft or AT&T, Koch Industries tends to fly under the public radar screen. Yet as the Center has previously reported, Koch — which owns refineries that can process over 800,000 oil barrels a day, and operates some 4,000 miles of pipeline — is a prolific political donor. Today, Koch is the second-largest privately held company in America.”
Well, if you answered “the oil industry,” you might be on a good track. The Cato Institute, which sponsored a series of full-page ads in the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Washington Times, the Chicago Tribune and the Los Angeles Times, is famously a paid apologist for organizations like the American Petroleum Institute (API).”
and Patrick Michaels:
about Swanson and Tsonis
One of the studies cited by the Cato Ad is Swanson and Tsonis, which has been making the rounds of Denialosphere seperately from the Cato meme. As RealClimate points out:
“The use of the recent Swanson and Tsonis paper is simply opportunism. Those authors specifically state that their results are not in any way contradictory with the idea of a long term global warming trend. Instead they are attempting to characterise the internal variability that everyone knows exists.”
Jeremy Jacquot at DeSmogBlog looked at this one in more detail in:
For some reason it is once again faddish in the Denialosphere to be terminally stupid about CO2 science. The recent outbreak of the pestilence include Avery:
“The American Daily has just published this laughably wrong piece of disinformation by long-term global warming denier Dennis Avery, “Now CO2 is Declining as well as Temperatures.” Before AD and Avery take it down, let’s look at what passes for analysis among the deniers.”
Then there is the Competitive Enterprise Institute (another bogus think tank) and their ‘CO2 is your friend’ campaign:
One of the stupider arguments making the rounds in the media is that “carbon-dioxide-is-not-pollution– it’s life”.
Grumbine feels it necessary to answer the question Does CO2 correlate with temperature?
Lately I’ve been seeing the assertion that carbon dioxide (CO2) levels have no correlation with temperature changes, particularly not over the last 100-150 years. I discussed a form of this, where the site was asking you to estimate the correlation by eye and doing a misleading job of it. It’s a bizarre claim, however, given that even at the eyeball level the figures in that previous note of mine show a pretty good correlation.
And Michael Tobis exposes one of the CO2 frauds making the rounds in And What’s Wrong with This Picture?
about Al Gore and sea level
A new “Climate Denial Crock of the Week”
BONUS: Debates & Heartland
Two points I have made before are affirmed by the International Journal of Inactivism in Bet: bad. Debate: good. Thus said Galileo viz Deniers:
- HATE bets (see here and Brian Schmidt) where they have to put their money where their mouth is and state clearly what it is they are actually saying;
- LOVE the public circus of debates where they can gush lies and nonsense and “win” through performance rather than content (here, here, here, and here);
Pharyngula has a wonderful post of the invitation to Nicholas Gotelli to debate Creationism and his marvelous response (How to respond to requests to debate creationists). In reading it simply substitute ‘climate change denial’ for ‘creationism.’ Enjoy!
- Rush Limbaugh and the Heartland Institute: I am Ignorance, Hear Me Roar
- Last Cries From The Climate Denial Extremists
I doubt very much that it’s their last cry, but more on that later. Take home lesson? climate change Denierism, it’s all lies.
We give our consent every moment that we do not resist.
Denier “Challenge” aka Deathwatch Update: Day 162 … still no evidence.