All posts in climate change denial

  • ice sheet collapse
    Peter Jones - May 13, 2014

    Another Denialist Argument “Collapses”

    In recent years there has been a controversy over the shrinking Arctic ice cover. Besides disputing the extent and the significance of the loss of ice, Denialists “refuted” scientific observations by referring to the Antarctic.  In parts of the Antarctic ice cover was increasing, which was enough to provide talking points to Denialists who did not consider the whole picture.

    Yesterday scientists reported that the collapse of large parts of the ice sheet in Western Antarctica appears to have begun.  The collapse, which appears to be irreversible, will cause a sea level rise of such magnitude that many of the world’s coastal cities would eventually have to be abandoned.

    Read more

  • Kentucky mountain top
    Peter Jones - March 11, 2014

    Anti-Global Warming US Senator

    Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) puts “the case” against global warming in easy-to-understand terms.

    First, according to Senator McConnell: “For everybody who thinks it’s warming, I can find somebody who thinks it isn’t.”

    The Senator is a Kentuckian.  Kentucky is old king coal country where they remove mountain tops to get at the coal. Finding somebody in Kentucky who disbelieves global warming shouldn’t be hard.

    Read more

  • wellington-640x360
    Peter Jones - January 30, 2014

    Attacking credibility is easier than attacking Science

    Attacks on the credibility and integrity of scientists who were the authors of the Fourth Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change were without merit.  Yet the tag of “Climategate” stuck, and public support for measures against climate change dropped.

    A group of New Zealand Denialists with the fanciful title of the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition, attempted to use this technique of attacking credibility to undermine reports from Government scientists.

    Read more

  • wg1cover
    Peter Jones - December 30, 2013

    Beyond a Reasonable Doubt

    The recent IPCC Assessment Report concluded as a “virtual certainty” that Greenhouse Gases were the principal cause of climate change.

    In a previous commentary we anticipated the response of denialists. We observed that:

    • cautious language in the Report would lessen its impact on public opinion;
    • the use of the qualifier “virtual” – after all these years of study some lay persons might expect a direct statement that either GHG are a cause or they are not!
    • climate models projected an increase in the world average temperature as a consequence of increased GHG emissions. Denialists point to a pause in global warming over fifteen years while emissions have increased.

    To avoid interminable discussion over the significance of “virtual”, 4RG has a different approach.   Yes, until new observations are made and further studies carried out there is a “doubt”.   But the world must not wait until every last “doubt” is resolved.

     “The Science is very clear and the debate is over. Climate change is happening now, it’s getting worse and humans have caused the majority of it,” said Christian Holz, Executive Director of Climate Action Network Canada. “Climate scientists have done their job – again – in making this clear beyond any reasonable doubt and now the issue is in the hands of societies and their leaders to fix.”

    Read more

  • Peter Jones - October 24, 2013

    We are not surprised!

    If we are permitted a bit of exaggeration, we would say that Canada has not a hope in hell of reaching its Copenhagen targets for reduced Greenhouse Gas emissions.

    Not even its supporters expect the Harper Government to be a miracle maker.  Yet that is what is required if we are to meet this target.  Implementation of the long promised regulations on the oil and gas industry won’t do the trick. . . . and, apart from stricter emissions standards for motor vehicles (adopted from the USA), there is nothing else on the agenda.

    Today Environment Canada finally released its analysis of GHG emission trends – three months behind schedule.  Perhaps Canada’s new Environment Minister had to warn her colleagues that the situation described in the report would not be pretty.

    Then again perhaps not.  No one in this Government appears to believe in the necessity of avoiding global warming, possibly because they don’t accept the science.

    Canada was failing in the other years since Copenhagen but this year it flunked out!  
    Read more

  • Peter Jones - August 23, 2013

    A Commentary on The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fifth Assessment Report

    The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) “took a hit” when it released its Fourth Assessment Report in 2007.  That Report contained one significant error (the claim that Himalayan glaciers would disappear by 2035).  Soon after the report was issued, the “Climategate” controversy broke out.  Critics suggested that factual statements in the report had been edited to support a global warming theory.

    Although independent peer reviews confirmed these “edits” were appropriate, the tag “Climategate” stuck.  Denialists attacked subsequent IPCC analysis of climate change issues by linking the analysis to alleged deliberate misrepresentations in the Fourth Report. To Denialists, Climategate was proof of a underlying unscientific bias that undermined any IPCC conclusions.

    For further commentary on ClimateGate go to
    Durban Day 8: Climate Change Strikes Again!
    Discussions with friends about ClimateGate
    Does it Matter?

    If one can judge by the commentary on the draft text of the soon-to-be- released Fifth Assessment Report, the IPCC has attempted to avoid controversy over this report.  The language in the report is temperate even if the global warming crisis isn’t.

     In this soon-to-be-released Report the IPCC will claim “as a virtual certainty” that human activity – the burning of fossil fuels – is the cause of global warming. The use of the term virtual is consistent with the empirical nature of the evidence on which the Fifth Report relies. Yet the public will not appreciate the reason for the qualification implicit in that word.  The use of such language will create doubt, a legacy of Climategate.

    Read more