Thursday, May 18, 2006

Inconvenient Truths and the Inconvenient Honest People Who Tell Them

Some people aren't too happy about Al Gore's new movie An Inconvenient Truth. Guess who? Think Progress has the story: Big Oil Launches Attack On Al Gore:
Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) will unveil two 60-second TV ads focusing on what it calls "global warming alarmism and the call by some environmental groups and politicians to reduce fossil fuel and carbon dioxide emissions."

As usual, all you have to do is follow the money to find out who's more credible. According to Mother Jones, ExxonMobil alone had given almost $1.4 million to CEI as of this time last year.

The root problem here is a textbook-worthy example of what's wrong with our media's constant and inappropriate insistence on "balance," which is achieved by finding some dingbat or dipshit (any ol' dingbat or dipshit will do!) who counters whatever the facts are. Couple that with a big, fat industry that's got plenty of money to provide very believable-sounding dingbats and dipshits, and this is what you get: continued confusion on something that's not confusing.

Say it with me now, and continue to say it as loudly and vociferously as you can whenever and wherever the subject comes up: human-caused global climate change is happening. It is a fact, not a theory, and it is not contested by any impartial scientists.

See this Science Magazine article, The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change:
Some corporations whose revenues might be adversely affected by controls on carbon dioxide emissions have also alleged major uncertainties in the science. Such statements suggest that there might be substantive disagreement in the scientific community about the reality of anthropogenic climate change. This is not the case.

...This analysis [of 928 scientific studies, of which zero disagreed with the concensus position] shows that scientists publishing in the peer-reviewed literature agree with IPCC, the National Academy of Sciences, and the public statements of their professional societies. Politicians, economists, journalists, and others may have the impression of confusion, disagreement, or discord among climate scientists, but that impression is incorrect.

...there is a scientific consensus on the reality of anthropogenic climate change. Climate scientists have repeatedly tried to make this clear. It is time for the rest of us to listen.


At 8:22 PM, Anonymous Nick said...

I've posted a full commentary about these CEI ads and the internet frenzy surrounding them at greenr.

If you look at it, there have been 4 cycles of cooling and warming of +/-5 degrees C over the past 450,000 years, and I'm betting there weren't CO2 spewing humans to blame back then, so why should they be to blame now?

We are in the MIDDLE of a warming cycle, that still has +5 degrees C to go. Of course we are seeing global warming.

See my site for the full details.

At 4:26 AM, Blogger C said...

I went over to "nick"'s site, greenr, to see the full details. I wound up leaving the following quote. I'll post it here, too, in case "nick" deletes it.

"Nick", I was brought here by your comment on my blog ( This sure is a nice, slick-looking site, but oddly I can't find any information about who produces it, writes it, and pays for it, or why. Smells like astroturf to me, backed by someone like CEI, and ultimately, by oil money.

As you'll see if you look at this Science Magazine article ( - or, in case the link doesn't work, search for "Scientific Consensus on Climate Change" at, a survery of 928 scientific papers, dealing with every imaginable aspect of the issue of human-caused climate change, found ZERO scientists contesting the basic assertions that humans are causing warming, and that this is a Bad Thing.

To commenter "rockhound": LOL, buddy; LOL. I think it is you and yours who "do not have a clue regarding the science involved," and who is stuck with a simple “belief” that anything mankind does is good. And to even imagine that all of these scientists (ALL of them; not ONE dissenter in NINE HUNDRED TWENTY-EIGHT) are lying to protect their individual salaries is ludicrous. Compare that to the utlra-rich, biggest-profit-in-years oil companies. Who has more to lose? Who's more entrenched? Who could more easily switch to another career or industry if their side is bullshit?

Wake up, folks. You're suckers. You're trading the future of the inhabitants of this planet, and you're not even the ones getting mega-rich off of it (if you were, you'd hire suckers like yourselves to be your mouthpieces). If it weren't so tragic, it'd be funny.


Post a Comment

<< Home