Governments Try to Control Language about Climate Change

I guess the United States isn't the only country where the government tries to tell scientists what their data actually says or should say. According to articles out in news media around the world, China, Saudi Arabia and other countries have joined the United States in requesting/requiring that scientists tone down the dire warnings contained in reports on Global Warming.

From the LA Times:

A new global warming report issued Friday by the United Nations paints a near-apocalyptic vision of Earth's future: hundreds of millions of people short of water, extreme food shortages in Africa, a landscape ravaged by floods and millions of species sentenced to extinction.

Despite its harsh vision, the report was quickly criticized by some scientists who said its findings were watered down at the last minute by governments seeking to deflect calls for action.

More below the fold...

Much of the article in the Charlotte Observer was similar. It was written by an AP reporter. I noticed it did leave at all mention of the dire effects in North America. Hmmmm.....funny, the Associated Press would toe the Bush line....again. Sad, for us that the Observer chooses to do the same. Fortunately, we can still find better, more independent reporting from the LA Times.

They end their piece:

The U.S. delegation opposed a section that said parts of North America could suffer "severe" economic damage from climate change.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi said in a prepared statement that political agendas need to be left behind and quick action taken to cut emissions.

"Global warming is already underway, but it is not too late to slow it down and reduce its harmful effects," she said. "We must base our actions on the moral imperative and the scientific record, free of political interference."

Susanne Moser, a research scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo., said the political changes to the report do not diminish the need for action.

"When you have it this black and white, it is very hard to deny the reality and continue to do nothing," she said. "I don't know how you do that if you have a moral bone in your body."

Horrifying and encouraging at the same time. Take these reports and imagine the news at least a little bit worse than it is and you should have a fairly accurate picture. The science of global warming is real. This isn't speculation. Please read the articles.

Here are a few more:

The source itself: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Daily Telegraph - Australia
Harford Courant - Connecticut
iafrica.com

Oh, and if you're wondering what we can do at home besides the obvious, Tim Toben visited BlueNC yesterday and offered some simple steps. It isn't necessarily going to cost you more to save the earth.

Trackback URL for this post:

http://bluenc.com/trackback/6004
0

Go to the IPCC site

Very interesting.

Have lots of errands to run before our trip tomorrow, but will check in later.

Robin Hayes lied. Nobody died, but thousands of folks lost their jobs.

momoaizo's picture

Another website to check out is

The US Environmental Protection Agency's site called, State of Knowledge on Climate Change.

Follow this link on their site, Extreme Events, scary stuff, but...."where's the evidence?" Fools, willing to ignore facts so they can do what...line their pockets? Pfffft!

No matter that patriotism is too often the refuge of scoundrels. Dissent, rebellion, and all-around hell-raising remain the true duty of patriots.

Progressive Discussions

momoaizo's picture

But if we keep denying that it's happening

it will cost us the world. Somehow the truth of climate change has got to get thru to asshats that still toe the bush line and think that it's their duty to protect big oil from us "evil treehugging liberals". I mean.....how in the world can a truly thinking person say something like this:

It is unbelievable to me that so many have not only accepted as fact that global warming is occurring, that such warming will produce catastrophic results, and such warming is man-made. Where is the evidence?
An article in The Wall Street Journal (April 4) by Holman W. Jenkins Jr. states that the only "evidence" seems to be that the planet has warmed by 1 degree over the last 100 years. He then says that figure is produced by massaging inconsistent readings from many places and times.

Some geological scientists have opined that the method used does not produce a meaning-ful data point, and they have likened it to averaging the phone numbers in the phone book. Moreover, scientists point out that the hypothesis that carbon dioxide creates warming is flawed because the geologic record suggests the earth was much cooler in the past despite CO2 concentrations higher than today's.

The Wall Street Journal, a well know Scientific Magazine....uh huh...Of course this....(place adjective here)person ends his harangue with minimizing Gore,

Doesn't it bother anyone that Al Gore responded to a congressional committee question that he sees no conflict in his admonishing the world to substantially reduce its energy demands while his home uses 10 times the amount of energy of the average home?

Why no conflict? Because he has purchased "energy credits" to offset his excess energy use.

Aww yes, their best defense, big house and not a republic, therefore what they say couldn't possibly be true.

No matter that patriotism is too often the refuge of scoundrels. Dissent, rebellion, and all-around hell-raising remain the true duty of patriots.

Progressive Discussions

Bwahahahaha

he Wall Street Journal, a well know Scientific Magazine.

Bwahahaha....good one Mo.

Robin Hayes lied. Nobody died, but thousands of folks lost their jobs.

Leslie H's picture

Science haters ... all they've got is

pointing at Democrat's houses? sheesh. That won't help any of us when the social and economic chaos brought by G.W. (oh,me oh my ... looky at that ... is that a sign?) hits. Returning adults to the White House will help the situation I think.

Feeling rather helpless about the whole deal in practical terms, a few months back I decided to replace my exhaust belching mower with a Neuton cordless electric mower. I should be able to do it by May ... maybe sooner since annual reviews at work went much better than I had expected. :) I'm so excited!!

Wanna see a pic of my new baby?
Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket
Neuton Mower by DR Power Equipment

Cool

Let me know how it holds up . . . I've been thinking about one myself, but I'm not sure it would be heavy duty enough . . . or have a charge that lasts for the whole yard.

Leslie H's picture

I will.

My yard is small ... a typical in town plot, maybe 0.1 acre. I think it will work out well for my needs. One thing's for certain, at least I won't smell like a gas pump every Satuday after mowing. AND the biggest benefit ... I'll be able to mow early ... when I get up ... when it's cool ... at 6am ... without getting shot. That alone will be worth any shortcomings my new little baby might have. ;)

Blue South's picture

We have had

an electric mower the whole time. Granted, ours runs off the house, and not a battery, but its still gotta be better for the environment than gas powered.

Draft Brad Miller -- NC Sen ActBlue :::Petition

This bears repeating - early and often

Returning adults to the White House will help the situation I think.

Re: Electric vs. Gas Mowers - We have too much grass to cut to use an electric mower, so this year, I've taken the side yard that is basically hard to mow because of pine tree roots, etc., and I've purchased wildflower seeds from the cooperative extension. We will have meadow. No more mowing - at least there. Hopefully butterflies and birds, too.

"Be the change you wish to see in the world." - Gandhi

Colin Powell Weeps at Obama Victory

"Look what we did. Look what we did."

Calendar

«  
  »
S M T W T F S
 
1
 
2
 
3
 
4
 
5
 
6
 
7
 
8
 
9
 
10
 
11
 
12
 
13
 
14
 
15
 
16
 
17
 
18
 
19
 
20
 
21
 
22
 
23
 
24
 
25
 
26
 
27
 
28
 
29
 
30
 
31
 
 
 
 
Add to calendar