Green smear campaign?

Professor Richard Tol, co-lead author of the IPCC report economics chapter publicly disagreed with the overly alarmist projections in the summary for policymakers and is now getting heat from the greens. An article in the Mail Online covers an alleged smear campaign thought to be sourced from Bob Ward, London School of Economics Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and Economics.  Professor Tol believed the summary for policymakers was “sexed up” to make the gloom and doom of climate change sound much worse.  The Grantham Research institute has been on attack (Scientists Challenge Climate Change Denier) and discredit mode since Tol went public.
Examples of the “sexing up” of the report from the Mail Online:
Migration
Summary “Climate change is expected to increase the displacement of people” because of extreme weather.
Report: ‘Current alarmists predictions of so-called “environmental migrants” are not supported by past experiences of responses to droughts and extreme weather events, and predictions of migrant flows are tentative at best.’  Also, ‘The use of the term “climate refugee” is scientifically and legally problematic.”
(The rather silly publications of so-called “climate refugees” storming into Canada are prime examples of this extreme alarmism).
War
Summary: Increased wars and conflicts
Report: ‘Research does not conclude that there is a strong positive relationship between warming and armed conflict.”
Food
Summary:  Warming will have negative impact on crop yields and we are already seeing it for wheat, maize, rice and soya.
Report:  Admits claims based on computer models and not data.  Data show skyrocketing yield increases of these crops since 1960.
(Note:  these doom and gloom claims can be easily checked and refuted by simple internet searches.  You have to wonder why they would add stuff like that.)
Extreme Weather
Summary:  Climate change has made risks ‘moderate’ and will only get worse.
Report:  Claims of rising losses are not based on scientific methods and evidence for climate-change river floods is not compelling.
The smear campaign seems to be by attacking supposed refusal to correct minor errors in publications that he appears to have already corrected.  Also, according to the Grantham Research Institute, he is now a dreaded “climate change denier.”  It seems that the church of global warming does not tolerate dissent or disbelief.
The comment that the scientists and government types worked into late nights “hammering out” the final wording was quite moving.  It seems from the ‘leaks’ that the report and summary were done before they all took off for Japan.  The skeer is a continuing drumbeat of climate doom and gloom if we don’t atone for our sins.  These alarms seem to be a possibly shriller rehash of stuff we’ve been hearing for two or three decades.
http://junkscience.com/2014/04/06/green-smear-campaign/

Comments

Post a Comment