Now that key Green issues such as global warming, organic food and eco-friendly products are really hitting the mainstream, we're starting to see the inevitible counter-attack from those on the far right who are attempting to stem the growing momentum by propping up phony scientists, taking comments out of context and flat out lying.
There are a number of topics I monitor on a daily and consistent basis and while I've been thrilled to see the coverage grow exponentially in all forms of media, over the past couple of weeks I've noticed a growing number of conservative bloggers attempting to debunk global warming in particular.
Check out this
excerpt from a press release sent out by the notoriously conservative Cato Institute promoting an upcoming speech by the Czech President:
"Klaus recently took issue with global warming alarmists, asserting "Global warming is a false myth and every serious person and scientist says so. It is not fair to refer to the U.N. panel. The IPCC is not a scientific institution: it's a political body, a sort of non-government organization of green flavor. It's neither a forum of neutral scientists nor a balanced group of scientists. These people are politicized scientists who arrive there with a one-sided opinion and a one-sided assignment." Klaus also said, "other top-level politicians" do not express their global warmingdoubts because "a whip of political correctness strangles [their] voice."It sounds like he would fit right in our very own neo-conservatives. But that's another story.
The general statement that the IPCC (
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) is "not a scientific body" must be a talking point created by conservative think tanks and sent out to all related organizations because it is popping up frequently. As is often the case with using this sort of tactic, while the principle statement may technically be true, it totally (and deliberately) misleads the audience.
Here is a brief exerpt of the IPCC's mandate and membership from
its own web site:
"Recognizing the problem of potential global climate change, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 1988. It is open to all members of the UN and WMO.
The role of the IPCC is to assess on a comprehensive, objective, open and transparent basis the scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant to understanding the scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change, its potential impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation. The IPCC does not carry out research nor does it monitor climate related data or other relevant parameters. It bases its assessment mainly on peer reviewed and published scientific/technical literature (emphasis added). Its role, organisation, participation and general procedures are laid down in the "Principles Governing IPCC Work
So let's be clear, this is an organization that is open to all members of the UN and WMO - it is not a self-selected group of Greenies out to prove a point. And the reports it issues is based on peer reviewed and published scientific/technical literature - a very standard and accepted procedure.
History has shown time and again that those who benefit from harming others and the environment will say and do almost anything to prevent change from happening - just think of the millions who have died due to the lies and negligence of tobacco and chemical companies, to name but two industries who have been found guilty in these and other areas.
But it is very frightening to have those in high government posts (even within smaller countries such as the Czech Republic) as well as the media (more on this in a bit) spouting lies and cow-towing to the nay-sayers when it has been so well established that global warming is primarily human-caused and is rapidly changing the environment we live in.
On the media front, there was much anticipation in some conservative blogs about a "documentary" that claimed that "man-made global warming is a myth." It was to feature a US scientist Carl Wunsch, professor of physical oceanography at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, as one of the leading proponents of its hypothesis. The show aired last Thursday on Channel 4 in the UK.
Here's the problem:
According to the Guardian (UK), Wunsch
"said the film, The Great Global Warming Swindle, was 'grossly distorted' and 'as close to pure propaganda as anything since World War Two'." He is considering legal action.
More from the Guardian's coverage:
He says his comments in the film were taken out of context and that he would not have agreed to take part if he had known it would argue that man-made global warming was not a serious threat. 'I thought they were trying to educate the public about the complexities of climate change,' he said. 'This seems like a deliberate attempt to exploit someone who is on the other side of the issue.' He is considering a complaint to Ofcom, the broadcast regulator.All of this serves as a reminder that whenever disruptive forces emerge (such as the growing mainstream environmental movement), one can - and should - expect immense resistence from those who still benefit (via profit or power or both) from maintaining the status quo as long as possible.
David R. Kaufer
Founder and Chief Green Officer
Green for Good
