Comments on: When will our bloody journalists wake up?

By: Steve Netwriter

Steve Netwriter — Fri, 02 Jul 2010 07:58:20 +0000

Hi guys,
I really needed to read things on this site. The MSM and politicians are driving me crazy.
Thanks for reminding me that there are sane people in this world.

And thanks to Andy for the Thatcher link, very interesting.

By: Richard Treadgold

Richard Treadgold — Mon, 14 Jun 2010 04:01:00 +0000

It’s all right, Andy, I was pulling your leg a bit but also speaking to bystanders.

By: Andy

Andy — Sun, 13 Jun 2010 10:13:05 +0000

Hi RIchard,
I’d be happy to contribute material on this. I need to do some more research first.

In terms of NZ’s MSM, I am not quite sure what to make of them. In the UK, there are a number of papers who realise that AGW is essentially a tool of the left, and science has taken the back seat.

The AGW propaganda machine has been very effective in that sceptics are marginalised as “deniers” and lumped in with creationists, AIDS deniers, pro-smoking etc etc

When I first encountered this attitude I was gobsmacked and soon realised that this was not science we were talking about.

Margaret Thatcher is often quoted as the “founder” of the AGW movement, and Christopher Booker published an interesting article yesterday:
Was Margaret Thatcher the first climate sceptic?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/7823477/Was-Margaret-Thatcher-the-first-climate-sceptic.html

This is really well worth a read.

These are some salient quotes:

Mrs Thatcher was the first world leader to voice alarm over global warming, back in 1988, With her scientific background, she had fallen under the spell of Sir Crispin Tickell, then our man at the UN. In the 1970s, he had written a book warning that the world was cooling, but he had since become an ardent convert to the belief that it was warming,
Under his influence, as she recorded in her memoirs, she made a series of speeches, in Britain and to world bodies, calling for urgent international action, and citing evidence given to the US Senate by the arch-alarmist Jim Hansen, head of Nasa’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies.

But then comes the generally untold story:

In 2003, towards the end of her last book, Statecraft, in a passage headed “Hot Air and Global Warming”, she issued what amounts to an almost complete recantation of her earlier views.

She voiced precisely the fundamental doubts about the warming scare that have since become familiar to us. Pouring scorn on the “doomsters”, she questioned the main scientific assumptions used to drive the scare, from the conviction that the chief force shaping world climate is CO2, rather than natural factors such as solar activity, to exaggerated claims about rising sea levels. She mocked Al Gore and the futility of “costly and economically damaging” schemes to reduce CO2 emissions. She cited the 2.5C rise in temperatures during the Medieval Warm Period as having had almost entirely beneficial effects. She pointed out that the dangers of a world getting colder are far worse than those of a CO2-enriched world growing warmer. She recognised how distortions of the science had been used to mask an anti-capitalist, Left-wing political agenda which posed a serious threat to the progress and prosperity of mankind.

We should remember that Margaret Thatcher was one of the few world leaders in recent times with a background in scientific research.

By: Andy

Andy — Sun, 13 Jun 2010 09:33:18 +0000

I meant practical benefit in terms of reducing global or even local emissions.

I take it as a given that we are being ripped off. Sorry if I didn’t make that clear.

By: Richard Treadgold

Richard Treadgold — Sun, 13 Jun 2010 07:33:32 +0000

You’re right, Ralph. Despondency is a strong temptation!

The NZ CSC is making a little headway, though. Yesterday, Terry Dunleavy’s piece calling on John Key to discipline or dismiss Peter Gluckman was broadcast on both 1ZB and TV1.

We must keep talking, here and in our own circles. We all have our lives to live and duties to fulfil, but any sacrifice we make of time or effort will mean a little less ignorance, a slightly more correct policy or a few more people with better knowledge of their situation. We can treasure that.

By: Richard Treadgold

Richard Treadgold — Sun, 13 Jun 2010 07:26:06 +0000

I completely agree with your comments. However, although we might “give up” on the MSM to the extent of not relying on them just now for the complete picture, I nourish the hope that things will change. It will only take a couple of good journalists to wake up and show the way for others to join in.

I hope you keep pushing the bureaucrats for answers. If you want to write a piece describing what you’ve been doing in that regard, I’d love to publish it. It doesn’t have to be long, just informative.

By: Richard Treadgold

Richard Treadgold — Sun, 13 Jun 2010 07:21:05 +0000

You’ve given us some interesting figures, Andy. You’ve uncovered a contradiction in what the government is telling us and highlighted the spit our farmers are being skewered with. You’re right — they’ve got nowhere to go.

I think you let the government off a little lightly, however, by saying there will be no effects from the ETS. Because of course there will be an enormous effect. It will move money from consumers to the carbon traders, principally at first the power generators, oil companies and large emitters, as they take advantage of their free allocations.

By: Richard Treadgold

Richard Treadgold — Sun, 13 Jun 2010 07:01:00 +0000

Thanks, Ron. Although I believe we’re right to oppose AGW, it’s encouraging remarks like these that make the hours of effort worthwhile.

By: Ron

Ron — Sun, 13 Jun 2010 02:06:03 +0000

I live in Dunedin too and despair at our media’s dereliction of duty.
Thank you Richard for the work you do here, and hope you can make headway with your questions Andy. It is incredible to see the refusal of the political establishment in NZ (and UK) to face the reality. Thank heavens for so many intelligent blogs.

By: ralph hayburn

ralph hayburn — Sat, 12 Jun 2010 11:22:54 +0000

You’re quite right. I’m writing this from the UK, aware that the European newspapers have long since ditched the IPCC’s extreme claims. But in Dunedin, where I live, nothing I was able to do before coming away would persuade the ODT to publish any of the articles I am reading daily which offer alternative hypotheses to AGW. The local population is kept in ignorance as a result, at least by this newspaper. But it seems that few of NZ’s dailies are any different, and we have an appalling state broadcaster. So unless people read for themselves on the Net, they will remain unaware of all but the politically correct ‘line’.