Liar,Liar, Earth’s Not Afire! Be Cool About Climate…

While propagandists for any cause will invariably put their spin on subjects they tackle, it’s a bit much when they use public funds to do so. The issue of climate is wide-open for debate, but too many of the UN-sponsored IPCC materials are treated as gospel instead of the partisan diatribes they truly are.

Worse, you find total skunks like those in East Anglia whose antics were exposed in the ClimateGate Scandal – that Jones creep who gloated over the fatal heart attack that killed one of his challengers -they appear to have been wilfully obstructing critics who only wanted to check their data.

But let’s look at the latest expose. 

I’m not saying this latest scare story, debunked by a valiant Canadian, is a lie, but it certainly has been presented in such a manner as to diminish its potency as an argument.


Excellent article this month by Lorne Gunter in Canada’s National Post, reminding any of us who think the IPCC is a credible organisation that…well, I’ll give you an extract and the link, in a moment,

The National Post is perhaps one of the few Canadian newspapers left that has not been taken over by pinkos, and Mr. Gunter is a brave spokesman for independent thinking, notably on the subject of ‘global warming,’ or ‘climate change,’ or whatever the panic-merchants use as their current buzz-word.

Still, who could have imagined that the IPCC would have emerged from these setbacks so cocksure that it would return to its old ways of conflating environmentalist propaganda with scientific investigation? But it has.   

Steve McIntyre

 Canadian researcher Steve McIntyre discovered earlier this week that the IPCC’s recent report on alternative energy — which asserted that it was possible to convert the world to 80% green energy by 2050 if politicians would simply tax conventional sources and spend billions on alternative sources — was lifted largely from Greenpeace reports.

The lead author of the IPCC report turns out to be Sven Teske, a Greenpeace climate and energy campaigner, who the IPCC does not identify as such in either the report or its media releases. Mr. Teske is also the author of much of the Greenpeace material on which the IPCC report is based, in effect making him a peer reviewer of the validity of his own material.

Imagine the reaction, for instance, if a government had produced a fossil-fuel friendly report based on work by an oil sands engineer, without revealing the source, and had paid the same engineer to write its own summary of his initial work.

That is what the IPCC has stooped to in this case and it eliminates any credibility the organization had left on the climate file.

Thanks be for honest men like Lorne Gunter, and the National Post. I don’t get much chance to see the new Canadian Sun TV channel,  but perhaps Canadian readers can bring me up to speed with how good its expected dissenting stance on news themes.