Climate Deniers Seek a “Fresh Start”

May 6, 2015

bookofdenial2a

Not The Onion.
In an effort to defibrillate a moribund and morally bankrupt movement, the Science-Denial-for-Hire “Think” Tank Heartland Institute is advertising it’s next “Conference on Climate Change” in a style more fit for a remake of “West Side Story” by Trey Parker and Matt Stone.

Heartland promises:

Some of the policy questions the conference will explore and discuss:

  • Is the rising concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere a net positive or net negative for plant life, animals, and human prosperity?
  • What is the cost of restrictions on energy generation and consumption imposed by the Obama administration and the United Nations?
  • Is it moral to withhold affordable and reliable energy from poor people living in the U.S. and those in emerging countries?

The last bullet point ringing ever more hollow in the face of Pope Francis’ imminent Letter on Climate Change.

Bud Ward for Yale Climate Connections:

As reported by the National Catholic Reporter, the Ghanaian Cardinal Turkson pointed to 2015 as “a critical year for humanity,” a reference to the United Nations climate change conference scheduled for December.
The coming months “are crucial, then, for decisions about international development, human flourishing, and care for the common home we call planet Earth,” Turkson said. He said Pope Francis “has echoed the sense of crisis that many in the scientific and development communities convey” about the state of the planet and its impoverished populations.

Turkson was quoted as saying Pope Francis, in the upcoming encyclical, hopes to spread the “warmth of hope … in the midst of those he has called the ‘Herods,’ the ‘omens of destruction and death’ that so often accompany ‘the advance of this world.’”

bookofdenialWhile acknowledging some differences among advocacy interests concerning causes of climate change, Turkson, the Associated Press reported, said that “what is not contested is that our planet is getting warmer,” and he pointed to “ancient biblical teaching” spelling out the responsibilities of Christians to act to address the associated problems.
“For the Christian, to care for God’s ongoing work of creation is a duty, irrespective of the causes of climate change,” Turkson said then. “To care for creation, to develop and live an integral ecology as the basis for development and peace in the world, is a fundamental Christian duty.” AP reported Turkson as saying the Pope is “compelled by the scientific evidence for climate change” Pope is “compelled by the scientific evidence for climate change” and compelled by “a truth revealed” in Genesis 2:15 on a sacred duty to till and keep the planet.
“He is not making some political comment about the relative merits of capitalism and communism,” Turkson continued. “He is rather restating ancient biblical teaching …. He is pointing to the ominous signs in nature that suggest that humanity may now have tilled too much and kept too little.”
… Yet seen as unprecedented, far-reaching
While perhaps the most definitive and in-depth “hint” of the papal encyclical now said to be nearing the final stages of preparation, Cardinal Turkson’s remarks are not the only ones providing comfort to those hoping for a strong boost from the Pope leading up to the year-end Paris meeting. Washington Post religion reporter Michelle Boorstein wrote in late April that “most pope-watchers think Francis will raise urgent concerns about global warming and highlight human impact on climate change.”

She attributed to “church historians” the sense that the expected encyclical “represents the first time in memory that such an important papal writing is being timed by a pope to influence a civil process.”  She wrote too that the Pope may well emphasize the issue “as a core Catholic social justice concern, up there with topics such as poverty and abortion”(but, apparently, with no reference to birth control or over-population).

Below, the film “Merchants of Doubt” shows why groups like Heartland are so Heartless:

Advertisements

17 Responses to “Climate Deniers Seek a “Fresh Start””

  1. dumboldguy Says:

    Are they really using that sparkly “fresh start” imagery in their advertising materials? Lord love a duck, but they are tone-deaf and clueless beyond belief (although it will all probably go over big with their “core” audience).

    You say the conference will “explore and discuss” certain policy questions.? Don’t you mean that they will again lie, distort, and obfuscate truth as they propagandize for delay on dealing with the root cause of AGW? We already know the script for this remake of a tired old movie—-tell me if I’m mistaken. The answers are:

    “Is the rising concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere a net positive or net negative for plant life, animals, and human prosperity?”

    Of course CO2 is a “net positive”. And Heartland will have their shill Craig Idso there to prove it. He will wave the book that says so (that he has written) as proof.

    “What is the cost of restrictions on energy generation and consumption imposed by the Obama administration and the United Nations?”

    Ah yes, the obligatory Obama and UN bashing. Need to stir the juices of the mindless right wingers with visions of out communist-socialist-fascist dictator president and the one world government he is leading us towards. And of course the cost will be too high (to the bottom lines of the corporations and the pockets of the plutocracy). BTW, this is just a warmup to the Pope and Hillary bashing that Heartland will need to segue into as Obama leaves the stage.

    “Is it moral to withhold affordable and reliable energy from poor people living in the U.S. and those in emerging countries?”

    Ah, the old “affordable and reliable energy for poor people” bullshit. Leave it to Heartland, the group that also thinks encouraging smoking among “poor people in the U.S. and abroad” is moral, to use that as an argument to continue burning fossil fuels. Be prepared for “ASPCA shivering puppies” type ads of energy-deprived poor people shivering in the cold and dark.

    Yes, what will happen at Heartland is too predictable. The only real question in my mind is whether Russell Cook will be a featured speaker, and whether or not he has taken our advice RE: losing the stupid visor, getting some Rick Perry “Don’t I look smart” glasses, and ditching the opening 30 seconds of his talk where he admits to knowing no science and being no more qualified than anybody that could be pulled off the street. I’d bet that he will be there, since he appears to be among Heartlands’s “best and brightest” (as well as on the payroll).


    • Still living rent-free in commenter “d.o.g.”‘s mind, I am. Sure is roomy in here, with all the well-worn unsupported talking points all lined up for quick re-use. Keep using the “on the payroll” line, it is a measurement for how deep you dig your credibility holes. Yep, I’ve paid my way there out of my own pocket, and I’ll wear the visor because it is how you people will recognize me – and I do sincerely invite you to attend. Good chance that ThinkProgress’ Emily Atkin will be there on my invite ( https://twitter.com/emorwee/status/596666074944385024 ). Did y’all catch her piece a couple of days ago which mentioned me? I linked to it in my blog post yesterday ( http://gelbspanfiles.com/?p=2792 ) along with the lady who endeavors to stick the ‘murderer’ label on me. As I said in that post, I have a dozen+ email correspondence going on with Ms Atkin. If she starts to seriously examine myriad faults in the smear of skeptics, can you afford to lose her to the skeptic side?

      Meanwhile, keep right on using the denier label to your [oblivious] detriment. As Lord Monckton so brilliantly pointed out for all to see last year, there was not a denier among all the folks you so bitterly despise: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSVI-EdgLr4#t=818

      One more thing – if you-all can actually bear to read my above blog post – you’ll see how I invite AGW folks to examine things (their own logic, material they hold dear, material they despise in order to know exactly what they despise). You-all constantly tell people what NOT to look at, and you seem petrified at the prospect of what might happen if you look at skeptic material. Think about it, why would you be afraid to attend ICCC10?

      Meanwhile, how’s that Merchants of Doubt movie working out for ya? According to this site http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=merchantsofdoubt.htm it stalled out at under $200k in tickets. I saw it, and will write a review at AmericanThinker maybe next week on how it felt compelled to use misdirection to make its point about skeptics’ ‘misdirection. Great line in the movie about how once the secret to a trick is revealed, you can’t not help but spot the trick.

      • dumboldguy Says:

        Our resident flaming anal orifice and fool from Heartland is back, slinging more of his bullshit and earning his whore’s dollar. Let’s help him by wasting the time to respond.

        First, look at all the links Russell has posted. How authoritative and intimidating! He is oblivious to the fact that he has provided us with evidence that people all over the web are constantly flushing his toilet just as we do here on Crock (including on his own site!). He is so clueless that he proudly struts for us (demented rooster in the barnyard etc) and thinks he is ‘winning” just because he has so proclaimed. Here are some selected comments on Russell and his ilk from his own links and his own site. People speak truth to Russell everywhere (and he ignores all).

        “People at the Heartland Institute are trolling the internet, looking for places to put this garbage up,” he said, “to muddle things.”

        You can see detailed financial records demonstrating the funding of paid liars in right-wing “think tanks”. They are disseminating falsehoods and misrepresentations and being paid by vested interest to do so”.

        “Why you are still attempting to deny these matters of fact is a mystery unless it is that you are paid to peddle misinformation about this topic. And we both know that you are, so there is our answer. You are nothing more than a paid shill yourself”.

        “Nobody just gives money to hacks like you to write as and what you please. That’s an absurd and patently false claim. You are paid to peddle falsehoods with a specific accent on the lie that the denial industry isn’t funded by vested corporate interests. You seem to think we are idiots who know nothing of the real world and so can be lied to like children. You are mistaken.”

        “I see hundreds of millions of dollars. I see you lying about the sums involved, trying to downplay the amount of money being pumped into the denial industry by its corporate sponsors. I see you here, right now, shilling for them again.”

        Yep, these folks know our Russell, and hold him in the same low regard. Glad to see that he is being banned and having comments deleted on many sites. It’s too bad that Peter is so lenient with flaming anal orifices and fools like Russell—-I for one would like to see him “disappeared”—-his one-note song is getting quite boring.

        PS Russell says he’ll “wear the visor because it is how you people will recognize me”? Sorry, Russell, but we recognize you because you are a Whore for Heartland and the fossil duel interests and by the lies you tell, not because of your “fashion fails”. Clueless fool!

  2. Sir Charles Says:

    As Peter Sinclair put it some years ago: “Those who spread the misinformation and outright lies of the climate denial industry, are useful idiots of some of history’s coldest and greediest killers.

    No more to add.


    • Pretty much pure psychological projection out of the AGW side, there, though I wouldn’t apply the ‘coldest & greediest’ bit. But when it comes to the misinformation stuff, such as out-of-control warming Arctic, one truly wonders if AGW promoters really do have blood on their hands if their material gave the recently (apparently) lost Arctic explorers a misguided notion that a subfreezing situation couldn’t imperil them in late April. As I asked the lady who endeavors to stick the ‘murderer’ label on me, what’s been the recorded temps at Resolute ( http://www.athropolis.com/temperature/resolute.php ) in the last couple of weeks nearest to where those explorers were last heard from? She felt compelled to delete my questions from her blog, of course, because they totally undermined her entire premise.

      Who are the real deniers of climate change? That would be you guys, of course, with your advocating of a static climate never changing from some arbitrarily chosen level of around 150 years ago. Has that wipeout not yet dawned on you-all?

  3. Gingerbaker Says:

    “What is the cost of restrictions on energy generation and consumption imposed by the Obama administration and the United Nations?

    Is it moral to withhold affordable and reliable energy from poor people living in the U.S. and those in emerging countries?”

    Just who is making such arguments??

    Wait a sec….. its the not-so-occasional commenter on every AGW blog I have come across, that’s who. Must be nice to know Heartland agrees with your arguments, I suppose.

    And this is why I think it is really important to frame green energy as much more economical then fossil fuels at every opportunity, to always talk about the huge economy of scale of large-scale projects, and to stress the fact that we can have super low-cost energy from nonprofit utilities if we demand it.

  4. andrewfez Says:

    They’ve taken down the Bin Laden signage and put up ISIS replacements. Maybe some ideas about wind turbines beheading birds or something.


    • Not to worry, your Pulitzer-winning hero has already come to the rescue several years ago, 42:25 point of this video. Too precious, “they don’t eat up a lot of birds”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?&v=FnF_AFnGW3Q#t=2534

      And y’all complain about the ‘denier’ side spreading misinformation……

      • dumboldguy Says:

        And he’s right—they really don’t eat up a lot of birds. As usual, you are the one spreading misinformation here, Russell—-and that’s because you’re a dishonest Whore for Heartland who will tell any lie for a buck. How do you look at yourself in the mirror without puking?

        Anyone who wants to google “causes of bird deaths” can easily find the truth. Look here:

        http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/08/25/3475348/bird-death-comparison-chart/

        ….and here:

        http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/21/science/21birds.html?_r=0

        (Apparently HOUSE CATS kill over ten times as many birds as wind turbines do)

        • andrewfez Says:

          There’s a Nation Academy of Science publication that backs up the relative kill numbers, though it would take me 1/2 an hour to look through all my saved links to find it. Some house cats are serial killers…

      • andrewfez Says:

        I don’t know who that guy is but he makes a fair point about the oil CEO’s wanting regulation so they can all invest in clean energy together, without getting undercut or capitulating to shareholder pressure. Cheveron has done solar-thermal in CA and Exxon pushed solar pv prices down 90% in the 70’s, &c. They’re interested – they just need the right platform to pull the trigger; even more so now that the new tech is getting cheaper and cheaper [see Lazard LCOE].

        • dumboldguy Says:

          They’re just dipping a toe or two in the water, looking at each other over their shoulders, and covering their asses with their shareholders at present. They won’t get serious about renewables until the SHTF and the economic model of the fossil fuel industry takes a major hit. The “platform” is going to be disruptive and painful for all of us when it arrives, and the sooner it happens the less painful it will be.


  5. I’ll say it here, I’ve heard it from the conservative folks I know, and I bet it will be on the agenda at this event – one of the new memes in the denial-sphere is how pollution is the third world’s fault.

    Now it is a safe reach to imply (but never admit) that CO2 is a pollutant, and that’s only safe because they can blame it on India or China or ‘the third world’. Talk about taking what was once a progressive idea to raise awareness of global justice for the world’s poor, and turn it into a slur.

    It’s the poor making all that trash that ends up in the Pacific Gyre. It’s the poor and their substandard living, burning dung and brown coal and chopping down forests for wood to burn, and destroying ecosystems. They need our sophisticated help for sanitation and health.

    Yep, that’s one I’ve heard from three different deniers recently, and so I wonder if it is a pre-buffer to raise against any concern the pope may show for the poor. He may (and most likely will) say we must side with the plight of the global poor and work for justice…but if the Fox News crowd has already heard about how the poor are the ones causing the problems, then they can immediately discount anything else the Pope may say.

    It is not corporatocracies and greed that causes the problems the poor suffer, but the poor themselves making a mess of this planet (those dark skinned savages!) because they just don’t know any better. Bless their hearts.


  6. Talking point #794 out of the AGW playbook, commenter Galen Gallimore equating particulate pollution with the oderless colorless non-pollutant CO2 which you can breathe all day long in its current mixture with oxygen & nitrogen with no ill effect. The only reason why CO2 has the ‘pollutant’ label is because the EPA claims it deserves that label over a notion that it imperils health & human welfare from the potential threat (some time in the indeterminate future, in other words) of catastrophic man-caused global warming – a notion provide to EPA from IPCC assessments, of which those assessments might just very well violate EPA’s own requirements for assessments to meet their standards of transparency, data availability and due diligence.

    Got disappointing news for y’all, the people at ICCC10 have no intention of blaming ‘the poor’ for what little global warming we’ve seen over the last century. But some on your side are blaming the poor’s and China’s particulate pollution for the 18 year pause in the warming, in case y’all haven’t noticed.

    • Gingerbaker Says:

      “The only reason why CO2 has the ‘pollutant’ label is because the EPA claims it deserves that label over a notion that it imperils health & human welfare from the potential threat (some time in the indeterminate future, in other words) of catastrophic man-caused global warming – a notion provide to EPA from IPCC assessments, of which those assessments might just very well violate EPA’s own requirements for assessments to meet their standards of transparency, data availability and due diligence.”

      What happened – did you suffer an aneurysm there? Or are you the victim of brain freeze due to the extreme cognitive dissonance of the nonsense you were spurting vs common scientific knowledge?

      • dumboldguy Says:

        Russell didn’t suffer from an aneurysm or “brain freeze” (which in his case could be easily and successfully treated with Preparation H).

        The nonsense he is “spouting” about CO2 sounds like it came from the mouths of one of the Idso clan at the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, a wholly owned subsidiary of The Heartland Institute (the Idso’s are also connected to all the other lying POS denier organizations like CFACT, NIPCC, and SPPI). Is Russell guilty of “stealing” their thoughts without attribution? For shame.

        PS Craig Idso is paid ~$140,000 a year by Heartland. Is Russell jealous?


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: