Climate Craziness of the Week – Attention citizens! You Are Thinking The Wrong Thoughts

by Dennis Ambler

Those of who have long been in denial about the realities of global warming and the credibility of the IPCC, can now feel relieved, there may be hope for us yet. The diagnosis has been made; we have a psychological problem, which so far has failed to respond to the millions upon millions of dollars spent in “communicating” climate change to the masses.

However, the process of our redemption is already underway: A new publication called “Communicating climate change to mass public audiences” has just been presented to the UK Department of Energy and Climate Change, by the “Climate Change Communication Advisory Group”.

(Yes, the UK does have a Minister for Climate Change, however, in 1976, there was actually a Minister for Drought, who was one of the most effective politicians in history, because within three days of his appointment, it had started raining.)

What is the Climate Change Communication Advisory Group – This UK group is a project of the Public Interest Research Centre, an “independent” group who are partially financed by the UK government’s Economic and Social Research Council. CCCAG is university based, with five psychology departments involved, including the US and also has WWF-UK as a member.

Communicating climate change to mass public audiences Working Document, September 2010

“This short advisory paper collates a set of recommendations about how best to shape mass public communications aimed at increasing concern about climate change and motivating commensurate behavioural changes.

“Its focus is not upon motivating small private-sphere behavioural changes on a piece-meal basis. Rather, it marshals evidence about how best to motivate the ambitious and systemic behavioural change that is necessary – including, crucially, greater public engagement with the policy process (through, for example, lobbying decision-makers and elected representatives, or participating in demonstrations), as well as major lifestyle changes.”

The first claims to exploring the psychology of “climate change denial” came from the University of the West of England last year.

Conference – Facing Climate Change, Climate Change Denial
University of the West of England, 7 March 2009
“Man-made climate change poses an unprecedented threat to the global ecosystem and yet the response, from national policy makers right through to individual consumers, remains tragically inadequate. The Centre for Psycho-Social Studies at the University of the West of England is organising a major interdisciplinary event Facing Climate Change on this topic at UWE on 7 March 2009.

Facing Climate Change is the first national conference to specifically explore ‘climate change denial’.

This conference aims to strengthen our awareness of the challenge facing us and to enhance our capacity for effective decision-making and action. It will do this by bringing together a group of people – climate change activists, eco-psychologists, psychotherapists and social researchers – who are uniquely qualified to assess the human dimensions of this human-made problem.

Professor Paul Hoggett is helping to organise the conference, he said, “We will examine denial from a variety of different perspectives – as the product of addiction to consumption, as the outcome of diffusion of responsibility and the idea that someone else will sort it out and as the consequence of living in a perverse culture which encourages collusion, complacency, irresponsibility.”

Read the entire essay here (PDF)

by Dennis Ambler | September 14, 2010
Those of who have long been in denial about the realities of global warming and the credibility of the IPCC, can now feel relieved, there may be hope for us yet. The diagnosis has been made; we have a psychological problem, which so far has failed to respond to the millions upon millions of dollars spent in “communicating” climate change to the masses.
However, the process of our redemption is already underway: A new publication called “Communicating climate change to mass public audiences” has just been presented to the UK Department of Energy and Climate Change, by the “Climate Change Communication Advisory Group”.
(Yes, the UK does have a Minister for Climate Change, however, in 1976, there was actually a Minister for Drought, who was one of the most effective politicians in history, because within three days of his appointment, it had started raining.)
What is the Climate Change Communication Advisory Group – This UK group is a project of the Public Interest Research Centre, an “independent” group who are partially financed by the UK government’s Economic and Social Research Council. CCCAG is university based, with five psychology departments involved, including the US and also has WWF-UK as a member.
Communicating climate change to mass public audiences Working Document, September 2010
“This short advisory paper collates a set of recommendations about how best to shape mass public communications aimed at increasing concern about climate change and motivating commensurate behavioural changes.
“Its focus is not upon motivating small private-sphere behavioural changes on a piece-meal basis. Rather, it marshals evidence about how best to motivate the ambitious and systemic behavioural change that is necessary – including, crucially, greater public engagement with the policy process (through, for example, lobbying decision-makers and elected representatives, or participating in demonstrations), as well as major lifestyle changes.”
The first claims to exploring the psychology of “climate change denial” came from the University of the West of England last year.
About these ads

207 thoughts on “Climate Craziness of the Week – Attention citizens! You Are Thinking The Wrong Thoughts

  1. O/T but Just been sent this link

    http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2010/09/say-goodbye-to-sunspots.html

    “Scientists studying sunspots for the past 2 decades have concluded that the magnetic field that triggers their formation has been steadily declining. If the current trend continues, by 2016 the sun’s face may become spotless and remain that way for decades—a phenomenon that in the 17th century coincided with a prolonged period of cooling on Earth.”

    John.

  2. “. . . as the consequence of living in a perverse culture which encourages collusion, complacency, irresponsibility.”

    Yeah, that’s my problem. Now that I know the diagnosis, hopefully I will soon be back on the road to spending my days wringing my hands over the impending doom caused by climate change — back on the road to recovery, yeah, that’s it.

  3. Just to show that climate craziness is not limited to the other side of the pond, this morning I received the following announcement from AAAS announcing a panel (to include our friend Gavin from NASA/GISS) on “Overcoming Skepticism after Climategate”:

    “Dear Member,

    This fall, AAAS is launching MemberCentral, an exclusive website for AAAS members. MemberCentral is dedicated to highlighting AAAS activities and fostering community among our members. To support these goals, the site will feature original content presented as webinars, videos, podcasts, blogs, and more.

    On September 27, 2010, at 12:00 p.m. ET, AAAS MemberCentral is conducting its first webinar: “Climate Change and the Public: Overcoming Skepticism After Climategate.”

    Featuring panelists Gavin Schmidt, Ph.D., of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS); Edward Maibach, M.P.H., Ph.D., of George Mason University ; Brenda Ekwurzel, Ph.D., from the Union of Concerned Scientists; and author and science journalist Chris Mooney, this discussion will explore ways the scientific community can combat negative public attitudes toward climate change. Panelists will share their best practices for public and media engagement, debate how to respond to critiques, and explore the idea of reframing climate change as a public health issue. ”

    Love the part about “reframing climate change as a public health issue”–we have gone from global warming to climate change to toxic climate.

  4. There are 2 scary things here:
    1) The gov funds a private entity to produce propaganda (so it won’t get caught doing it).
    2) Stalin and his ilk also used “psychologists” to label dissidents as mentally ill.

    Never occurs to these chaps that the ordinary citizen is not so stupid.

  5. “This conference aims to strengthen our awareness of the challenge facing us and to enhance our capacity for effective decision-making and action. It will do this by bringing together a group of people – climate change activists, eco-psychologists, psychotherapists and social researchers – who are uniquely qualified to assess the human dimensions of this human-made problem.”

    Thank goodness normal people are not being forced to attend.
    Guess who pays for this garbage?

  6. “the UK does have a Minister for Climate Change, however, in 1976, there was actually a Minister for Drought, who was one of the most effective politicians in history, because within three days of his appointment, it had started raining”

    Ah yes, John Selwyn Gummer. For an encore, he force fed burgers to his children on national TV to prove beef was safe to eat during the BSE scare.

  7. Maybe we are “thinking the wrong thoughts”, but we are feeling the right feelings; instead of pessimism, depression, doom, and despair, we seek creativity, joy, abundance, and freedom.

    The West spent a thousand years practicing repentance for imagined sins, until the Enlightenment made real earthy optimism and progress.

    Whatever the climate does, optimism and change are to be welcomed. They are our only hope.

    Feeling despair? Feeling lack? Feeling like you need to conserve your weak energies?

    Choose creativity. Choose excitement. Choose hope.

  8. “(Yes, the UK does have a Minister for Climate Change, however, in 1976, there was actually a Minister for Drought, who was one of the most effective politicians in history, because within three days of his appointment, it had started raining.)”

    I remember him. As I recall, he was translated from the post of Sports Minister. He had better luck with the weather than he did with football though.

  9. “We will examine denial from a variety of different perspectives – as the product of addiction to consumption, as the outcome of diffusion of responsibility and the idea that someone else will sort it out and as the consequence of living in a perverse culture which encourages collusion, complacency, irresponsibility.”

    So they won’t be examning ‘denial’ from the perspective of it being the product of people looking at the science and discovering the theory of man made global warming is a crock then?

  10. Criminy! That couple para’s in italics is downright spooky! Didn’t Stalin say something like this just before he shipped all those folks off to the Gulag?

  11. It reminds me of the days of the Soviet Union where people were sent to insane asylums because they did not accept Scientific Socialism.
    After all why would anyone reject a socialist paradise?
    They clearly must be mad and in need of psychiatric help.

  12. Propaganda that promotes group-think is an egregious affront to freedom. Not far behind such an endeavor are the laws that will impose this on you. This pamphlet should be snapped up by any and all independent minded citizenry and burned in the town square.

  13. Oh dear the veritable propaganda unit!!

    “This conference aims to strengthen our awareness of the challenge facing us and to enhance our capacity for effective decision-making and action. It will do this by bringing together a group of people – climate change activists, eco-psychologists, psychotherapists and social researchers – who are uniquely qualified to assess the human dimensions of this human-made problem.”

    They are going to work very hard to convince my fully qualified Psychologist son, as he certainly has their measure – eco-psychologists!! what next. Guess the best way to deal with them is laughter. Josh you should have fun with the next round of cartoons for these characters. Shades of Monty Python……

  14. The Minister for Drought was Dennis Howell, a Labour politician. Which makes sense really as there was a Labour government at the time. Selwyn Gummer is a Conservative.

  15. “…motivate the ambitious and systemic behavioural change…”

    What they seek to do to people, they first do to language. When you read such words, you know you are dealing with misanthropes.

  16. “tallbloke says:
    September 16, 2010 at 8:00 am
    “the UK does have a Minister for Climate Change, however, in 1976, there was actually a Minister for Drought, who was one of the most effective politicians in history, because within three days of his appointment, it had started raining”

    Ah yes, John Selwyn Gummer. For an encore, he force fed burgers to his children on national TV to prove beef was safe to eat during the BSE scare.” Yup, he did, but have any of his children died of CJD? I don’t think so. Not sure what your point was?

    Anyway, as one of those “decision-makers” I am inundated by invitations to seminars, training and any other kind of brain-washing you could imagine to make sure I start thinking the “right” way. The bombardment is pretty relentless and it worries me that I see other decision makers falling for it all which makes it harder and harder to resist unless you are a committed Climate Audit, WUWT, Bishop Hill et al reader.

    Flooding is the worry word down my way – it doesn’t seem to be so much about extreme heat in this part of the south-west of the UK – and there all sorts of training courses on how to help avoid flooding in the future. There don’t seem to be many comments about not building on floodplains, probably because they’ve already covered them with buildings, and now any flooding that does occur is obviously because of climate change. Seems like a big scam to me to stop those poor souls in house on floodplains from pointing the finger at government and councils and holding them liable for permitting development there. Is that they mean by “the consequence of living in a perverse culture which encourages collusion, complacency, irresponsibility”?

    Perhaps I’ve got that the wrong way round………………………..

  17. This might work if no one ever went outside to see what the weather was like. What they really need is some device to stop persistent arctic blocking patterns that leads to cold and snowy periods in the UK. But I guess if someone could control the weather, there would be no need for psychologists to control the way people think. (Not that the psychologists are any better at controlling thinking than the climatologists are at controlling weather.)

  18. tallbloke says:
    September 16, 2010 at 8:00 am

    “the UK does have a Minister for Climate Change, however, in 1976, there was actually a Minister for Drought, who was one of the most effective politicians in history, because within three days of his appointment, it had started raining”

    Ah yes, John Selwyn Gummer. For an encore, he force fed burgers to his children on national TV to prove beef was safe to eat during the BSE scare.

    Sorry Tallbloke, you are wrong, it was a labour government in 1976 and the Minister for drought was Dennis Howell.

  19. Hi. My name is Jim, and I am a recovering denialaholic. Gaia helps me feel the global warmth when it is cold. My brain is washed clean of common sense. I am now psychologically fit to recruit others to my way of life. Amen.

  20. Global warming, what global warming, climate what climate change? Over the past 200 years temperature has risen by 0.6 of 1 degree C per century, over the last 10,000 years there as been no change, from 1700 to 1735 temperature rose by 2.2C and if my memory serves me correctly coal fired powerstations, hundreds of millions of cars and industry as we know it today did not exist.

    James Hansen said that by 1980 the road alongside his office in Lower Manhattan would be submerged under 20 feet of water and by now New York would be 246 feet under the Atlantic.

    We have ARGO buoys measuring the oceans and sea temperature is going lower ensuring that the zero level of sea rise as measured for the last 6000 years remains on a plateau.

    Nancy Palosi speak for the house of representatives said “thank heaven for natural gas because if the USA didnt have so much we would need to rely on fossil fuels” if this statement is representative of the average American politicians intellect then we are in for serious trouble this side of the Atlantic because I doubt very much if Chris Huhne and his cross dressing partner are any more suited for high office.

    The final nail in the coffin though for the warmist advocacy is that to get a 1 degree C reduction in temperature by a reduction in Co2 would mean the USA removing 2 trillion tons of Co2 equal to 67 years of emissions at 30 billion tons a year meaning that most everything in America would need to shut down, including – a benefit – all of the hot air given out by numerous feckless idiot politicians.

    The cost of the Wax/Key leglisalation would be $250 Trillion, in the UK our climate change legislation is targeted to cost £18 billion a year over the 40 years to 2050 just to remove the 80% of the 2% we actually contribute in the UK, a total of £780 billion and saying that this is not a representative situation because we import stuff from China is irrelevant, the £780 billion is just for the 80% of 2% is some twerp suggesting we spend more and if so from where when most of the population received tax credits just so they can pay tax?

    Add to this the fact that the IPCC actually predict that emissions will peak in 2075 in anycase when population peaks and energy also and will then fall back so why should we commit ourselves to spending billions that can never produce the desired result when emissions first are undershooting predictions, temperatures are undershooting predictions and climate change because of a radical rise in temperature hasnt happened because temperature has not risen to the desperate levels predicted so come we have to pay a debt to the third world for climate change that didnt happen?

    Science should be about observation, experiment and measurement but with climate “science” it definitely is not its about hoax, sham and emotive rhetoric now completely shot through by the passage of time, measurement and fact.

    When will those involved look at the current data instead of speculation, denigration and personal vilification of anyone who cares to disagree and the fact that a body now wishes to indoctrinate us because we refuse to take them at their word is a worrying escalation, even more worrying is why, what is the objective of this new religion is it as was included in the back pages of the UN Copenhagen treaty the first steps towards a world government? I do not believe in conspiracy theories but apparently someone in HMRC had the bizarre idea that they should collect our salaries and pensions, deduct what they felt was required and let us have the rest seems like George Orwell might have been on the right track all along so where precisely does George Monbiot fit in right along side Chairman Ed Balls I suppose, if the name fits!

  21. There was an edition of New Scientist last year (which I just read recently) which devoted six or seven pages to discussion of various psychological ‘tricks’ (to coin a phrase) that could be used to manipulate people’s behaviour in the direction specified by the climate scientists.

    I’m generally extremely pro-science, but that really gave me chills.

  22. I found a similar study years ago that I quoted over at ClimateAudit. I think the link has disappeared, but the study had been commissioned by the UK government and was conducted by public relations people. One of their recommendations was that the government and proponents of AGW never admit doubts about the science and speak as if it was completely settled. In other words, act as if the debate was over and merely speak about solutions, whether their were valid reasons for skepticism or not.

  23. Re John McKay’s link

    “But the sunspot magnetic field calculations don’t take into account a lot of small sunspots that appeared during the last solar maximum. Those sunspots have weaker magnetic fields, which, if not included, could make the average sunspot magnetic field strength seem higher than it really was”.

    Perhaps I’m reading this wrong but it seems to imply (or admit) that (or I am assuming) that the small spots in the last solar maximum are as much a function of better observation than reality……. e.g. count history is messed up as has been suggested before on this site.

  24. “This short advisory paper collates a set of recommendations about how best to shape mass public communications aimed at increasing concern about climate change and motivating commensurate behavioural changes. . . ”

    Science? What science? If anything can make it clear to people how far from science this ‘climate change’ industry has gone, this ought to do it.

    Now if we had mainstream reporters worth their salt, they’d be all over this affront to the integrity of science and the intelligence of the public. But we don’t.

    How long are real scientists going to put up with this wholesale perversion of their enterprise before they speak up and confront the ideologues who have seized upon a speculation about climate and turned it into a quasi-religious crusade?

    Or are they all going to hunker down in fear until free scientific inquiry is completely stifled by the Ministry of Climate Truth?

    /Mr Lynn

  25. “We will examine denial from a variety of different perspectives – as the product of addiction to consumption, as the outcome of diffusion of responsibility and the idea that someone else will sort it out and as the consequence of living in a perverse culture which encourages collusion, complacency, irresponsibility.”

    Why aren’t they examining denial from the perspective of “many people are smart enough to realize that the evidence for CAGW is crap.”

  26. This is simple cause and effect – if you only award funding to people who have worked CAGW into there agendas, then eventually even the psycho-babble crowd will catch on.

  27. The University of West England…. UWE Brisol

    Sounds impressive. Its the old Bristol Poly.

    And not to be confused with Bristol University (A Russell Group University).

    Bet they have a Meeja Studies Department as well.

    And probably a Chair in Vuvuzuelarology.

  28. What corporation will provide the kilns this time? Hope these won’t run powered by wind mills, its low efficiency would be unbearable for us sceptics.

  29. This is not crazy or even evil, it is simply the politics of: fear, power and wealth in action, as is normal in all societies. That does not mean we should not be offended or simply accept unchallenged. Perhaps it means we to must put our ethics on hold and join the conversation or perhaps not.

    I have spent a goodly number of hours reviewing all the books and writings on philosophy that exist in my library. I could not find any reasonable justification for the end, however noble, justifying the means. I was reminded, this is a world view well articulated by Machiavelli in The Prince, although he never quite states it as such and it is a much older concept. His work is less philosophical then political. To paraphrase: if the Prince is to maintain his position or strengthen it then… what ever it takes to do so is justified, since the Prince’s desired outcome is defined as the greater good. While he may have addressed his work to a Prince of Florence, he could just as easily addressed it to the Prince of the Roman Church or any other leader of the day.

    This kind of thinking has no place in science, regardless of the name give to the study of the political. No model can produce results so important to humanity that unscientific or immoral behavior can ever be justified. It does have a prominent place in the public discourse of the day as propaganda, ideology and sophistry have always had.

  30. Who will be in charged of reeducating us? HE?????.
    Come on! are you kidding us?
    That would be a mass murder: We would die by laughing!

  31. Isn’t there some substance that they could put in the water to lower people’s facility for critical thinking? Maybe the Kool-Aide that they have been drinking?

  32. The comment ‘who pays for this garbage’ really sums this up. This is about money and how much can be extracted from the public purse allied to politicians who just love a crisis. Our incompetent and highly paid civil servants and their friends in the Quangos just blithely carry on ripping off the taxpayer – it may be for transport aircraft that can’t do war zones (whatever else are they for?) or a revenue that can’t collect tax properly or having plush offices and rich pensions. (I often wondered why my supreme boss had such a fancy chair – I had to sit in my bog standard model all day working at the computer. Was his bum different than mine?)
    Is this OT? Maybe, but I think the warmist scare is just part and parcel of a much bigger problem – the hubris of modern govt.

  33. If only they could control the information super highway, they’d be all set. Propagandizing was so much simpler back in Goebbel’s day. If you didn’t agree, why you could just be “interrogated” until you did. Nowadays, they have to trot out all this fancy schmancy psychobabble, and just hope people won’t catch on, or read all about on the internet. Oops.

  34. Seriously: It is evident that the manufacturers of alternative energy sources have a share in this global warming scam, but, are the technologies already available ? I think they are not, so what’s is the hurry, anything else perhaps, like avoiding an oil price decrease because of the big oil deposits recently found ?

  35. “We will examine denial … as the consequence of living in a perverse culture which encourages collusion, complacency, irresponsibility.”

    This *is* referring to that insularl community of Climate Scientists, isn’t it? You know, the ones denying that they have to do science the right way, the way it’s been done for 400 years, open to scrutiny, debate, and so on?

    Oh…. it means everybody else not getting with the Program??

    Hmm. I see.

    Nevermind.

  36. Another example of how CO2 obosession lowers the intellignece and increases the gullibility of those obsessed.
    It is long past time to reign in this popular mania, before it deteriorates from merely silly to actually dangerous.

  37. PLAN A:

    To trick the populace into accepting and believing in the fabricated AGW consensus by means of a mass media barrage of scare mongering stories of imminent doom and disaster, the scarier the better in fact.
    Centralise and control state funding of science where political control of resources can encourage science to pursue AGW ‘science’ while denying sceptical scientists of vital funding.
    Launch a campaign of smears and abuse and hatred against sceptical scientists and encourage the tame media to engage in a concerted censoring campaign to squeeze out any opposition to the AGW consensus.

    In case of the failure of PLAN A see:

    PLAN B

    Repeat plan A and add more tricks and more smears and more fabricated mumbo jumbo pseudo scientific jargon. The key is to understand that if the propaganda campaign has failed the AGW establishment remedy is to increase the intensity of the propaganda.

  38. Ministry of Climate Truth indeed. Chilling. Glad I live in Canada.

    Would like to hear from our resident Man Made Climate Change Believers to get their take on this bit of Orwellian news.

  39. It sounds like something from Mao’s cultural revolution; especially when you consider

    “greater public engagement with the policy process “

    I expect they don’t mean that I should get up and start lobbying AGAINST global warming measures; I’m sure they mean “toeing and regurdgitating the party line”

  40. Many thanks Anthony for drawing attention,
    This is excellent news. It is so much over the top that the only predictable result must be public derision. The spectacle of those who know, scientifically speaking, nothing about the subject they propose to arrange “communications” for is quite laughable. Let us make sure all of this nonsense is exposed as much and as publicly as possible, and that the incompetents involved are given as much chance as possible to put their foot in it……..
    The harder they shout, the clearer it is that its no longer about science (or maybe never was).
    ————————————————————————————-
    Lance Wallace says:
    September 16, 2010 at 7:57 am

    Just to show that climate craziness is not limited to the other side of the pond, this morning I received the following announcement from AAAS announcing a panel (to include our friend Gavin from NASA/GISS) on “Overcoming Skepticism after Climategate”:
    ————————————————————————————-
    We should encourage as many as possible of such occasions, because they will flush out the (not so hidden) agendas behind the “science”, and indicate out who is serious about enquiring into nature, and who is more concerned about self justification or, worse, interfering with other peoples lives.

    DFM (scientist)

  41. LOL, Gavin is going to “…share their best practices for public and media engagement…”

    So they intend to go from alarmist to hostile, rude and alarmist?

  42. hunter says:
    September 16, 2010 at 9:15 am
    …..before it deteriorates from merely silly to actually dangerous.

    Do you mean a WWIII ?, it is possible, as judged for the unquenchable and pasionate interests behind, don’t show not a bit of discouragement up to now.

  43. Dennis Nikols, P. Geol. says:
    September 16, 2010 at 8:50 am

    “I have spent a goodly number of hours reviewing all the books and writings on philosophy that exist in my library. I could not find any reasonable justification for the end, however noble, justifying the means. I was reminded, this is a world view well articulated by Machiavelli in The Prince, although he never quite states it as such and it is a much older concept. His work is less philosophical then political. To paraphrase: if the Prince is to maintain his position or strengthen it then… what ever it takes to do so is justified, since the Prince’s desired outcome is defined as the greater good. While he may have addressed his work to a Prince of Florence,****** he could just as easily addressed it to the Prince of the Roman Church *******or any other leader of the day.”

    Dennis,

    Had your library contained any books on the religion, philosophy, or teaching of the “Roman Church” you would not have suggested that Machiavelli “could just as easily addressed it to the Prince (Pope) of the Roman Church”, as it would have fallen on deaf ears since the “Roman Church” teaching has always been that “no evil may be done so that good may come of it.” To imply that the “Roman Church” uses the same techniques as communists is misleading at best.

    If you can find any official “Roman Church” teaching, or, any “Prince of the Roman Church” making a statement approaching the Marxist teaching of the end justifying the means, I will eat my words.

    Chris

  44. I feel the mainstream lifting my boat. Welcome, critical thinkers. I feel guilty for not whacking enough hippies with my Orwell and Rand collections in the sixties.

  45. tallbloke
    “Ah yes, John Selwyn Gummer. For an encore, he force fed burgers to his children on national TV to prove beef was safe to eat during the BSE scare.”

    Wrong. Minister for Drought was Dennis Howells – follow the link in the article. Mr Howells was our MP and took us on a tour of Parliament when on a school trip. A very decent man.
    I also had the misfortune to meet Selwyn Gummer and can say without doubt that he is the most odious [snip] I’ve ever met. I wonder if his daughter ever recovered from mad cow disease?

  46. Hunter, maybe you are on to something! Rising CO2 has lowered our intelligence! Have Hansen, Mann, and Jones been seen wearing oxygen masks?

  47. So McCright says that more women believe, and if more man would get in touch with their “feminine” side, then more men would believe…..

    …and now this

    They admit that the “science” has not convinced anyone,
    so they have to

    “the consequence of living in a perverse culture which encourages collusion, complacency, irresponsibility.”

    And they don’t think for one minute that what they are doing is collusion.

    They think we really are mindless sheep………..

  48. Only goes to show that there is no folly in the world unfit to be breast-fed with quango money, courtesy of the taxpayer.
    Painfully reminiscent of Labour insanity. If my memory saves me r., though — weren’t these loony-bin inmates voted out of office a few months ago?
    Unbelievable that their madness should be carried on by the new folks in charge of good old Albion.

  49. That’s the current administration’s current excuse for low approval.
    A failure to communicate.
    It’s laughable.

  50. Hunter, it is already dangerous. So many $billions wasted on nonsensical research; so much food diverted to making biofuel where fossil fuels are the better choice; so much misdirected capital going into “green” technologies that are premature or subsidized because they’re not currently competitive; and so much human capital constrained by marxist/fascist policies (like the approach exposed from the CCDAG). This is indeed the crime of the modern industrial age; climategate merely hastened its exposure. The criminality includes foisting a pseudo-science-based Cap and Trade bill on the US, while Europe is being crushed by a similar policy. The EPA is the worst offender with their stance on CO2.

  51. theduke said:

    I found a similar study years ago that I quoted over at ClimateAudit. I think the link has disappeared, but the study had been commissioned by the UK government and was conducted by public relations people. One of their recommendations was that the government and proponents of AGW never admit doubts about the science and speak as if it was completely settled. In other words, act as if the debate was over and merely speak about solutions, whether their were valid reasons for skepticism or not.

    Futerra’s Rules of the Game? (pdf)

    Followed with New Rules: New Game (pdf)

  52. Yes they really think we are all mindless sheep.
    And if they get what they want it would be a very ugly thing indeed.
    And might not be what they are aiming for .
    Because, as the Eco-Psychologist said to the lightbulb,
    “You have to want to change”.

  53. For a while I was labouring under the impression that, having read their research, digested their arguments, visited their blogs, the alarmists simply hadn’t proved their hypothesis. Now it turns out I was wrong all along, apparently I’m just plain nuts!!
    who’d have thought it.

  54. “Professor Paul Hoggett . . . said, “We will examine denial from a variety of different perspectives – as the product of addiction to consumption, as the outcome of diffusion of responsibility and the idea that someone else will sort it out and as the consequence of living in a perverse culture which encourages collusion, complacency, irresponsibility.”

    Notice that they patently accept the junk science of manmade global warming themselves and then assume everybody else is delusional. There is no mention that we may have a better grip on reality than they. THEY have been told the game rules and then they have to pretend that there is a valid game afoot.

    The descriptions of our “problems” above are downright insulting and denigrating. They are obviously arrogant and condescending, assuming, like all good liberals, that they they know better than we do.

    Notice that the goal is to create behavioral changes (do what we say, is their mantra) and create compliance for their money and power grab based on a false crisis. Hmmm, I haven’t seen “Gaslight” in a long time.

    The head of psychology at BU years ago was a winner. He did not believe that laughing is mature – definitely not a party animal! His wife, who was not allowed to emote for over 10 years, finally divorced him and has been laughing ever since. As far as I can tell, most psychologists are nut cases themselves – been there, are that.

  55. A perversion of the public health nurse. It worked back then to make conditions less conducive to wide spread disease. The public health nurse was all about cleanliness, quarantine, and immunization (which isn’t a bad thing in my opinion). Some of the last century’s public health nurse advisories are now mandated or at least made to make a person uncomfortable if choosing not to follow these advisories.

    So I guess this means that we will be funding another government agency likely housed in our still present public health offices in most towns and cities. Is this why we keep hearing that the best bet on a future stable job is in the health industry?

    I will have to give them kudos for coming up with this idea. Most of our elderly folks remember the days of polio and give full credit to public heath nurses for its near eradication.

  56. I know readers of WUWT like to keep their facts straight. George Orwell’s most famous book was Animal Farm, a parody of the rise of communism in Russia. What is being decribed in this post is more like Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World. With Big Brother watching everyone. It has been a long, long, time since I read Brave New World, but as I recall the protaganist was in charge of shoe production statistics. His job was to show that shoe production always increased. But, as he admitted to himself, he had no idea whether shoe production was rising, or indeed, if any shoes were produced. At least that’s the way I remember it.

    The book was supposed to take place in the 25th century C.E. Looks like we are getting there a lot quicker

  57. Someone is crazy here for sure …. but I think it is the publishers of this nonsense.

    It is breathtaking in it’s arrogance.

    But I would agree there is a psychological component to the AGW debate.

    It has been my personal observation that deep greens generally have a very predictable psychology :
    They are almost all far left in the political spectrum.
    They generally have some deep rooted sense of guilt.
    They believe government can solve any problem.
    They generally think people & corporations are inherently evil.
    They are generally prone to emotional responses to problems.

    Think about this list & think about the AGW hypothesis. It absolutely plays into everything their psyche believes. Is it any wonder there is a nearly religious fervor in their beliefs?

    So, as a scientist, I am fundamentally skeptical of AGW based on data. BUT just because the AGW believers don’t think like I do, I WOULD NOT say they are mentally defective – just wired differently. I wish they could see that just because skeptical folks don’t see the world the way they do that they are not mentally defective & that by labeling skeptics as such only further hurts their cause & makes it that much harder to achieve their goals.

  58. To David Wells’ Comment:

    David, you must realize that AGW has nothing to do with the science or saving the planet. It is a false crisis to create the case (by the IPCC) that we need worldwide emissions control. Then they can set up a carbon trading economy, a one world government, and carry out massive undeserved wealth redistribution, all under a totalitarian/socialist regime.

    Crippling and de-developing the Western World and preventing the development of the undeveloped countries would serve them well, as a means of retaining power. The latter would become huge welfare states, crippled forever by government handouts from ever taking their own initiative.

    By depressing the world, how could they not stay in power, particularly when they effectively disarm everybody and they have the only legitimate military (police/Gestapo/thugs) to force large scale compliance? Notice the International Small Arms Treaty (just agreed to by Clinton!) – why would the UN have any business knowing where all the guns are in the US, or any country, unless it is to eventually do something about them? They claim it is to better track illegal guns, but then why know where all the legal guns are? There is already perfectly good means of establishing the origin of a gun – starting at the manufacturer.

    The psych part described here simply hallmarks the fact that the science and climate are not the issue, it’s getting the people to do what they want. They want compliance and acquiescence to their agenda – and they want it now! We are standing in their way with our delusional smugness!

  59. I actually agree with everything in the UK report but it’s written by people who have only a basic knowledge of climate science and how much misinformation they have already absorbed. If you beleive in CAGW each section makes sense. My replies to each section would be as follows.

    1) Well done in recognising that climate change can’t be ‘sold’ to the public. You could have summed it up with the famous quote ‘you can fool all of the people some of the time…’

    2) Good luck with the scientific honesty thing. I’m not sure anyone knows what is truth and what is hype anymore. Climate science has experienced some humungous setbacks because it’s been far less than truthful.

    3) And you’re right, some of the biggest lies have been told about the mitigation strategies. Thing is, you might be shocked at how little is left once the kernels of truth are uncovered.

    4) The public have no empathy for ‘do as I say, not as I do’. Those who push climate change must lead by example. We’re waiting!

    5) Only third world people are using the levels of CO2 that CAGW theory demands. Would photos of starving Africans encourage you to adopt their lifestyle? Didn’t realise you are supposed to cut your CO2 that much ? Return to number 2) and 3).

    Harness the power of social networks? Sorry, sceptics got there first and apparently WE’re really good at it :-) And until 2) 3) and 4) are sorted, WE’re not going away.

    6) Spot on. If they mean global warming they should say global warming. However they’ve already discovered that the planet isn’t playing ball.

    7) They already do publicise frustration at lack of progress on CO2 mitigation. Unfortunately the numbers of people who fit that category are very small. Numbers of people protesting against CO2 mitigation are much greater. Do you see a pattern emerging?

  60. “Yes, the UK does have a Minister for Climate Change, …”

    This is Greg Barker, the sidekick of Buff Huhne, new Secretary of State for Energy & Climate Change (following the guy who promoted the 2008 Climate Change Act, the most expensive and the most pointless piece of legislation in UK history, the odious Ed Milipede, who seems set to be the next elected leader of the Labour Party Opposition.)

    Connoisseurs of such matters will remember Buff Huhne it was, who recently ditched wife and children for his lesbian lover.

    Previously, Greg Barker had ditched wife and children for his gay lover.

    Some years ago, Tim Yeo, now Chair of the Energy and Climate Change Parliamentary Select Committee, rather conventionally in such company, just turned out a couple of love children.

    Of course, I don’t care too much about their personal preferences but it does seem a bit rich when they actively campaign on a platform of strengthening family values and personal responsibility.

    With recent allegations against the Goreacle completely “disproved”, it is difficult to be sure whether all this is just ‘natural variability’ or rather yet another instance of CO2’s evil effect on society (or at least, our politicians). A hockey stick in the making?

    Now, what was it that these people wanted to “communicate” to those nasty deniers??

  61. Well, indeed. There is a reason for old in “old engineer” It was Geroge Orwell’s “1984” that I was thinking of. I told you it was a long time since I read them.

  62. hmm, all i can say is that my local weather here in Sacramento has been much cooler than usual the past 2 years or so…i was starting to believe in global warming around 2007 or so after we had some scorching summers, like 10+ days at around 110 degrees but we’ve seen a real cooling trend here in both winter and summer….just anecdotal evidence i guess but the media in the U.S. only reports it one way…when they had a hot spell around Wash DC earlier in the year the media were falling all over themselves about “make sure you drink plenty of water”(after all OMG its going to be 100 degrees!!)..,…

    would be interesting to hear from honest people from the Wash D.C. area if the media overstated that as usual, to fit their agenda…

    REPLY: A valid email address is required to continue commenting here. – See the policy page – Anthony

  63. Typical of British politicians. If the great unwashed don’t agree with them it means that they havn’t communicated the message in a way that we can understand.

  64. “Professor Paul Hoggett is helping to organise the conference, he said, “We will examine denial from a variety of different perspectives – as the product of addiction to consumption, as the outcome of diffusion of responsibility and the idea that someone else will sort it out and as the consequence of living in a perverse culture which encourages collusion, complacency, irresponsibility.”

    What? I’m not highly skeptical of the alleged “man caused climate change” because I buy things! Nor because I think someone else should deal with it! Nor out of any complacency or irresponsibility!

    They forget the primary reason for “denying” the claims of alarmist “man caused climate change” and that is that the alarmists have NOT provided actual verifiable hard evidence that CO2 does in fact raise temperatures. If they actually provided such evidence and a means to verify it and opened all their data, raw data, methods, source codes, programs, sensor designs, notes, emails, and all other relevant materials for public auditing then maybe I could go about verifying their claims. As it sits they want me to, ahem, “trust” them on their “word”. Not going to happen as I’m a scientist who demands that those claiming science actually use the scientific method and that those claiming doomsday and taking money from the public purse actually have ALL of their alleged science and it’s claims open for public auditing.

  65. Let’s round up the sceptics and bring them all near
    To whisper corrective words in their ear
    And if they persist in denying they’re ill
    We’ll have to force-feed them a gullible pill

    It’s not that we want to; it’s just that we must
    They’re all pathologically lacking in trust
    The problem is simple: the proof’s a bit thin
    But only the sceptics were not taken in

    We tried to appease them, we tried to persuade
    We’ve tried using fear, and some of us prayed
    But now there’s no doubting that doubt’s a disease
    We’ll bring the refuseniks all to their knees

  66. I knew the global warming hoax had no foundation, way before the year 2000. This makes me a bad citizen indeed since that year.

    like Galileo, brought in chains under threat of death before the papacy for asserting that the earth revoled around the sun, we are not well for maitaining the scientific temper.

  67. Tallbloke @8:00

    Dennis Howell was Minister for Drought.
    Selwyn-Gummer force-fed the poor child. (As Wiki shows world-wide 275 deaths due to that terrible disease BSE he can plausibly claim to be right!)

  68. PiperPaul says: “Perhaps re-education camps will be next.”

    No. Those might produce actual real jobs. Can’t do that. Your re-education will be outsourced to China or India.

    Now, imagine this (this would be a great plot line for a new sit-com). You are in a re-education camp in India. There will be a series of tests you have to pass to finally “graduate”. You ask a question. The teacher, whom you can barely understand, has a three-ring binder that he starts looking through, to find the answer to your question. He then looks you straight in the eyes, and (barely legibly) asks, “But have you unplugged the phone cord, and then plugged it in again?”

  69. Don’t underestimate the power of propaganda. Look at the frightening percentage of people who still believe Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

  70. To David Parks Comment: I jst posted a comment but it appears to have disappeared (and it was the first ime in a long time that I did not copy it first!). So here is another version. If the first is posted, Mr Moderator, please ignore this one.

    David, you have to realize that the AGW movement has nothing to do with saving the planet or the climate. It is all about creating a false crisis and a case for world wide emissions control. The goal is to create a carbon economy, a one world government, and force widespread wealth redistribution. This is a political agenda and it is not for the good of the people in any way.

    Crippling the world’s economies and wealth redistribution would de-develop the developed world and, through continuous welfare handouts, permanently cripple the undeveloped countries from ever developing, as they would have no initiative to develop, becoming huge nanny states. This crippled state would ensure that they would retain power.

    Notice the International Small Arms Treaty (just agreed to be Clinton!). Why would the UN have any business knowing where all the guns are in the US, or in any country, unless it is something they eventually will take care of? A world government would have to have the only legitimate military/police/Gestapo and would perforce need to disarm the people.

    They claim the Treaty makes it easier to trace illegal weapons, but there are already perfectly effective means of doing to – starting with the manufacturer.

    The psychology initiative described above points clearly to the fact that it is all about the agenda. They want compliance and acquiescence by the people and they aren’t getting it. They want what they want now! And we are standing in their way with our delusion thoughts based, to their dismay, on reality. It that an oxymoron?

  71. So, all year WUWT was trumpeting the for-sure rebound of arctic sea ice extent. When that didn’t happen, and instead this year’s low extent continues the trend of disapearing ice extent, WUWT is now trumpeting the for-sure cold winter we’re bound to have. Meanwhile, in a thread about the (nearly) unprecedented recorded occurrence of two Cat 4 Hurricanes in the Atlantic basin, respondents are wailing about how all the bad-ole climate change embracers will jump all over it and (incorrectly) reinforce their conclusions.

    [snip] . . what is your problem deliberately riding over the conditions of your registration on this blog? . . b.mod

  72. This is so we can be compliant jurors when the cases alleging actual damage from climate change get into litigation, which is where they are headed after the courts declined to dismiss them for non-justiceability and lack of standing. After all, the real reason people were hurt by Hurricane Katrina is because energy companies put CO2 into the air which strengthened the hurricane beyond what could possibly have happened without the CO2. Yes, it’s a real case.[ I presume you forgot to click sarc/on ] b.mod

  73. It was so much easier in the good old days when we cavemen just sat around the fire telling each other ghost stories.

  74. A question. If, despite all the propaganda about doomsday scenarios (which obstinatelt refuse to come to fruition), the general public continue to increasingly doubt what they’re being told, what then? Apart from pogroms, what else could be under consideration? A small, deliberate “occurence” maybe? Engineered to force people to believe? I wouldn’t put ANYTHING past them…

  75. Facing Climate Change is the first national conference to specifically explore ‘climate change denial’.

    The first, but definitely not the last. No doubt one of the top agenda items will be to establish the date and location of the next conference, preferably in a suitably exotic/sophisticated location where they will be able to stage numerous working breakfasts, working lunches and working dinners followed by catered receptions to discuss how tough it is to reeducate the little people (who pay the bills).

    Nice work if you can get it.

  76. I thought it was a joke – until I googled it.

    “Ecopsychology

    MA in Transpersonal Psychology

    The Ecopsychology degree concentration integrates psychology and ecology in the study of human-nature relationships. At Naropa University, contemplative practice and transpersonal psychology provide a foundation for this integration.”

    Now I know we live in a mad, mad, mad, mad world. Phil Silvers would have been proud.

  77. Tallbloke,

    “So they won’t be examning ‘denial’ from the perspective of it being the product of people looking at the science and discovering the theory of man made global warming is a crock then?”

    The notion that the public are looking at the science and discovering that it is a crock, does not enter into their consciousness. Some say, that when Don Cortez’s ships arrived off the coast of Central America, the natives did not perceive them. Sure, the light entered their eyes, but their minds shut out the images, they say. I never believed that story – until today.

  78. Those who attempt to shape your thoughts believe they can control you. Efforts to do this go back millennia. And, it has never worked. At least not for long, but the human cost has been very high.

  79. The greatest influence in my being skeptical and thereby, by their label a skeptic, alias a denier, flat-earther, etc has not been that I have been overwhelmed by irrefutable scientific logic one way or the other, but by the magnitude of their propaganda, the desperation of their agenda and the stench of their BS. No wonder there is a call to reorganize, to recruit the latest fad “professionals” (an eco-psychologist? WTF is that? ) . If the science was so right, there would be little need of population thought control, it would stand on its own as self evident.

  80. “At Naropa University, contemplative practice and transpersonal psychology provide a foundation for this integration.” ”

    That’s not Phil Silvers. That’s Professor Irwin Corey !

  81. Like several comments on this thread already noted:
    This easily qualifies as ”George Orwell: The Sequel”.
    If nothing else it serves as a good reminder to all of we the rational sceptics:
    ”The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.”
    Long live the Republic; and thanks again to WUWT for helping us to keep our eyes open. . . .

  82. @b.mod, re: “[snip] . . what is your problem deliberately riding over the conditions of your registration on this blog? . . b.mod”

    Sorry, didn’t see any ‘conditions of registration’. Nothing deliberate on my part, as no conditions were evident when I posted my comment.

    Reply:There are blog policies. I’m not sure what b.mod was objecting to here. ~ ctm

  83. oops, my apologies Anthony…i am just an avg person, didn’t think my handle or email was worth worrying over…..sorry…

    REPLY: It’s policy, if somebody says something that I have to deal with in some way, say a complaint, I have to be able to get in touch with them. Either provide a valid email address or please don’t comment further. – Anthony

  84. And then today, the left decides you were too stupid to understand their global warming myths, you will be stupid enough to not understand the latest sci-fi fiction, John Holdren’s latest non-sense “global climate disruption” — the latest lie.

    So they rename the hoax, ehhh???

    You need to ask yourself, how dumb do they think people are?

  85. I don’t believe there are many who deny that climates change but there are a whole lot of us that refute catestrophic CAGW. To continue to preach the IPCC sacred scripture using marketing tactics won’t make me a convert and I hope that there will be few other buyers.

  86. AGW will go down as the phrenology of the 20th century. The Phrenologists used to even have journals in the 1800s. Perhaps we can find one of them and have them analyze the bumps on the heads of the people pushing this stuff.

  87. I hope they go hard at this strategy.

    We live in a society bombarded by marketing messages like no other generation before. Advertizing comes into our homes through the TV shows we watch, sometimes popping up in the corner during the actual show as the advertizers know we got to the can during the commercials. The radio in our car breaks for adverts every few seconds, which distracts us from the billboards that have morphed from plywood signs in the ditch to full motion video on the sides of bus stops and buildings. Magazines have more ads than articles, mass transit is litered with ads, spammers are so sophisticated that it requires armies of programmers to keep them in check, my cornflakes this morning had a coupon for power drills in it, and don’t even get me started on browsers.

    The modern consumer is bombarded by marketing messages and subconsciuously filters out enormous amounts of misleading information so automatically we don’t even know we are doing it. Our BS detectors know in an instant when the language used to back up a product claim is founded upon incomplete or misleading data. We filter it out because our heads would explode if we didn’t. We are more immune to slimey marketing techniques than any generation before us, and we recognize in an instant when the message is delivered in a manner that suggests there is something to hide.

    So I would like to thank those marketing companies that have spent billions attempting to insinuate their messages into everything I look at or listen to or read. You have trained an entire generation to recognize and be skeptical of false claims at the subconscious level, and the psychomalevelantologists will fail in their fear mongering as a consequence.

  88. Vince Causey says:
    September 16, 2010 at 11:36 am
    It is not mad, madmen are usually more intelligent than the rest; this is silly, idiotic, stupid, oligophrenic.

  89. Orwell was only a few decades off and way ahead of his time, therefore a small adaptation in some of his 1984 quotes:

    “the consciousness of climate change, and therefore being in danger, makes the handing-over of all power to a small caste seem the natural, unavoidable condition of survival.”

    “How can I help seeing what is in front of my eyes? The records have been adjusted.”
    “Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are. Sometimes they are not. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It is not easy to become sane.”

  90. Enneagram says:
    September 16, 2010 at 8:50 am

    “What the heck is an eco-psychologist?”

    Eco-psycosis is the manifestation of the condition of enviro-mentalism. Eco-psycologists have found that this malaise can be treated by electro-shock therapy from the output of wind generators but is a process not without its risks due to the phenomena of tele-connect which can transfer the condition, during treatment, to the therapist. One safeguard under development has been called the ‘tinfoilhat’ which is currently with the UK Health & Safety Executive for approval of its efficacy.
    The use of wind generators as the source for the therapy has found to be particularly beneficial due to their intermittent and unexpected output which adds an apparently extra dimension of surprise to the treatment which helps those afflicted to come to terms with similar situations in the real world such as rejection of unfounded opinions, hostility to proselytising and receiving an offer of a job not advertised in the Guardian newspaper.
    (Whickedpedia. To add comments for incusion to this article, please complete the ‘fellow-traveller’ questionaire first.)

  91. Charles D. did the arctic sea ice go below 2007? No
    Did it go below 2008? No
    Did you hear 2010 was an El Nino year? obviously not…

  92. “George Orwell would be proud.”

    George Orwell would be terrified, because lets face it, traditional us-them right-wrong hoorah propaganda isn’t easy even when you have massive state organs and a willingly complicit media to help you implement it. Even in 1984, demonizing the opposing ideologies relied on simple accusations revolving around hazy moral degeneracy and vague ‘they’re out to get us’ sorts of stuff.

    But now… hey look, cuddly polar bears! You do like polar bears, right? Anyone who doesn’t is obviously evil. This whole “we know the answer, we don’t care what you say, and we’re going to save you if it kills you” stuff is a whole different level when it comes to promoting crazy statism.

  93. I notice that the UK propaganda site says four things and those four things are indisputably true. The problem is that they don’t add up to anything beyond a suggestion that further investigation is warranted.

  94. P Wilson says:
    September 16, 2010 at 11:06 am

    “like Galileo, brought in chains under threat of death before the papacy for asserting that the earth revoled around the sun, we are not well for maitaining the scientific temper.”

    Nice word picture but, since this site is about trying to ferret out truth, you ought to have a read in the venerable institution, Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo
    I suggest you read the whole article.

    An excerpt:
    By 1616 the attacks on the ideas of Copernicus had reached a head, and Galileo went to Rome to try to persuade the Catholic Church authorities not to ban Copernicus’ ideas. In the end, Cardinal Bellarmine, acting on directives from the Inquisition, delivered him an order not to “hold or defend” the idea that the Earth moves and the Sun stands still at the centre. The decree did not prevent Galileo from discussing heliocentrism hypothesis (thus maintaining a facade of separation between science and that church). For the next several years Galileo stayed well away from the controversy. He revived his project of writing a book on the subject, encouraged by the election of Cardinal Maffeo Barberini as Pope Urban VIII in 1623. Barberini was a friend and admirer of Galileo, and had opposed the condemnation of Galileo in 1616. The book, Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, was published in 1632, with formal authorization from the Inquisition and papal permission.

    Sorry, no mention of chains, or threat of death. It was at least as civil as Dr. David Suzuki’s suggestion that any politician who did not act on CAGW should be criminally charged, or something to that effect. Not that Suzuki is our scientific Pope. At least not so far………

    If only our current authorities examined the theory of CAGW as thoroughly we could save ourselves a lot of grief, and taxes.

  95. If still insisting on global warming/climate change what explanation can we have for this inexplicable stubborness? Once again, what is their ultimate goal?
    Some science fiction novels of the 1950’s described a future world which is owned and governed by a few corporations. But what for?, are its members inmortal beings?
    We must wonder how and what do CANCER CELLS associate among them and conspire to destroy the body where they live.
    A kind of Fidel Castro making a revolution to imprison himself in an island. That’s silly!

  96. The Anti-Denier Seminar Agenda

    DEALING WITH CLIMATE CHANGE DENIALISM

    AGENDA

    1.) Evidence -and why it isn’t necessary.
    2.) Rubbishing and ignoring contrary evidence.
    3.) How to get the most out of your adjusted temperature measurements.
    4.) Taking advantage of natural disasters.
    5.1) Taking advantage of hot weather.
    5.2) Taking advantage of cold weather.
    6.) Make your own hockey sticks: Hours of fun for all!
    7.) Advanced use of buzz words such as: “consensus,” “robust,” “peer-reviewed,” “unprecedented,” and “denier”.
    8.) Ad-hominem attacks -and how to make them really nasty.
    8.1) Arguing your case: If the denier is a scientist, he is obviously in the pay of “Big-Oil”.
    8.2) Arguing your case: If the denier is not a scientist, he isn’t qualified to give an opinion.

    ——————————-

    The existence of such a seminar explains a lot, and I suspect it is but one of many. It explains why there is such a regular party line amongst AGW nuts all over the world, and it explains why the same insults and the same rubbish is trotted out again and again.

    ——————————–

    Suggested Seminar Agenda:

    1.) Stop calling so-called “man-made global warming” critics “deniers.”
    2.) Freeing the data and the code, so that MMGW skeptics will have less to complain about.
    3.) Learning how to be nice to people who disagree with you.
    4.) Stop calling our critics “deniers.” This is really important, and so hard to do.
    5.) Responding to FOI requests openly and honestly.
    6.) Conflict of interest: cleaning up the way we do business.
    7.) Stop calling our critics “deniers.” Yeah, it’s hard, but it makes us look really stupid.
    8.) Psychological projection – the unwitting act of ascribing your own faults to others.
    9.) Confirmation bias: “There are none so blind as those who will not see.”
    10.) Circling the tribal wagons: a guest lecture by Judith Curry.

  97. To underscore how stupid CO2 is making people, think about how the promoters are once again rebranding AGW as ‘global climate disruption':

    http://www.presidentsclimatecommitment.org/about/climate-disruption

    and of course the University presidents are ready willing and able- if properly funded- to provide the vital leadership required to save the planet!
    “Higher Education is necessary to successfully eliminate this threat – a challenge of massive proportion which will require transforming our economy, our institutions, our daily lives within a generation, and hence requires the active leadership of higher education to overcome. No other institution in society has the influence, the critical mass and the diversity of skills needed to be successful.”
    And yes, I checked: this is not part of the ‘Daily Onion’.

  98. vukcevic says:
    September 16, 2010 at 12:34 pm

    No joke: You could find a correlation of GMF with this insanity, as it is known from old that changing meteorological conditions stir up asylums.

  99. Come on guys, read the report!

    http://coinet.org.uk/sites/coinet.org.uk/files/Communicating_climate_change_to_mass_public_audiences_0.pdf

    It actually urges the sorts of honesty we’ve been demanding. I know that the aim of the document is to convince the public that CAGW is real but it might have the reverse effect. When the enemy starts offering you what you want (inadvertantly) you have to accept it.

    The conference – Facing Climate Change, Climate Change Denial, was back in March 2009. We’re now post Climategate and eyes have been rudely opened since then. I’m not saying that the AGW hard sell is over but the language has changed. Eg The UK is now stressing mitigation rather than CO2 reduction.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/green-living/britain-must-adapt-to-inevitable-climate-change-warns-minister-2077175.html

  100. Kate says:
    September 16, 2010 at 12:55 pm
    The Anti-Denier Seminar Agenda

    Hey!, you just forgot: “Massaging lessons & Practice taught by a Nobel Prize recipient”

  101. “It will do this by bringing together a group of people – climate change activists, eco-psychologists, psychotherapists and social researchers”

    Mind surgery w/ Mass Social lobotomy.
    How to induce awareness of something that does not exist? Hypnosis and Medication.
    Whether as a desired result or by unintended consequence, the severely weakened society(s) will be ripe for invasion by external forces that are more than willing & able to finish the job.

  102. Enneagram says:
    September 16, 2010 at 1:05 pm

    “Sceptics will inherit the Earth”

    We wouldn’t disagree.
    Signed,
    The meek.

  103. I sent in my resignation from AAAS just now.

    Today I received my invitation to the first Webinar of
    your new website Member Central. This is titled Climate
    Change and the Public: Overcoming Skepticism After
    ClimateGate. I and I believe many other AAAS members
    am personally affronted by your choosing to present
    this panel, containing only apologists for the
    “consensus” view on climate change. The revelations of
    Climategate are a stain on science, and your attempt to
    treat it by an intensified PR campaign is distasteful
    and self-defeating. How much better it would have been
    had you chosen to present a proper debate, with AAAS
    scientists (e.g., Lindzen of MIT or Freeman Dyson) on
    both sides of the issue.

    For the first time, I am ashamed of my membership in
    AAAS and request that you terminate my membership
    immediately.

  104. I agree with many who observed that this government-funded program exudes strong and unmistakable aroma of Dr. Joseph Goebbels. In combination with the growing open, aggressive, deeply ingrained antisemitism among European bureaucrats and leftists, this gives you a good picture of who are our puppet masters.

    This “Goebbels phenomenon” is a direct consequence of the failure of a welfare state in general. Post-WWII British society is remarkably spineless and marasmic; an unprepared visitor, steeped in English culture and literature, full of respect for this country that invented and planted a good half of all things that we call “civilization,” once he finds himself in modern England, has a striking impression that most of the people there (not to mention the media) are decidedly insane.

    I suspect it has something to do with Winston Churchill: with how they all treated him and his ideas after the war, how they all are aware that they forgot their petty follies and called in for duty some real people of common sense only when they were in mortal danger, and how they betrayed them immediately as soon as that mortal danger faded away.

    Socialists, political prostitutes and promiscuous losers of all kinds and sorts are grasping environmentalist propaganda as their last straw, their last hope of imposing their guilt-ridden, destructive will on talented, hard-working benefactors of humanity they hate so passionately.

    What do people hate most? Somebody or something they know they betrayed, sold out, perverted, let down. Welcome to the Brave New World!

  105. This is new age quackery servicing the cult of Gaia …If Gaia is happy. we are happy; if we are to be happy, Gaia must also be happy! Good grief.

    Ecopsychology, or eco-psychology as it is sometimes called, is situated at the intersection of a number of fields of enquiry, including environmental philosophy, psychology, and ecology, but is not limited by any disciplinary boundaries. At its core, ecopsychology suggests that there is a synergistic relation between planetary and personal well being; that the needs of the one are relevant to the other.

    http://www.ecopsychology.org/

  106. @ Phillip Bratby says:
    September 16, 2010 at 9:20 am …
    Please see hereunder my request for the “compelling” evidence!

    Ms. Clarke,
    I refer to an article released by the BIS on 16 September 2010 00:01 on the News Distribution Service of the UK Government, the URL is (http://nds.coi.gov.uk/content/Detail.aspx?ReleaseID=415474&NewsAreaID=2&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:%20bis-news%20%28BIS%20News%29#)
    In the article Sir John Beddington is quoted as follows, “The evidence is compelling that climate change is happening, that human activities are the major driver for this and that the future risks are substantial.”
    Please would you forward to me the whereabouts of this compelling evidence so that I might review it for myself.
    Sincerely,
    Stephen Brown

  107. The Climate Church wants you to repent brothers and sisters. We will forgive you your skepticism, come back into the fold! The end of the world is nigh and you need salvation through the one great truth, CAGW is the light that will guide you home! Amen brothers and sisters! Amen!

  108. Who among us, from time to time, has not had the impulse to build a wall around some group or place, declare it a mental institution and send in the shrinks?

    Only this time the shrinks are already inside the wall.

    Who will shrink the shrinks?

  109. Chas has given the link to the working document. Here is a link to the project (Climate Change Communication Advisory Group)

    http://www.pirc.info/projects/cccag/

    It gives a different link, and I haven’t checked if it’s the same report:
    CCCAG’s first report was presented to the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) in August 2010. Download the report http://pirc.info/downloads/communicating_climate_mass_audiences.pdf

    The contact is given as
    Dr Adam Corner (Group contact)
    School of Psychology 70 Park Place Cardiff University CF10 3AT
    Tel: 02920 870837 Email: corneraj@cardiff.ac.uk

    If you feel that your reason for being sceptical about global warming does not fall into the categories that they list, then maybe a phone call or email would be a good idea. (But please check first that the information I give is correct).

  110. TinyCO2 says:
    September 16, 2010 at 1:07 pm

    Come on guys, read the report!

    http://coinet.org.uk/sites/coinet.org.uk/files/Communicating_climate_change_to_mass_public_audiences_0.pdf

    It actually urges the sorts of honesty we’ve been demanding.

    I read it. All they’re attempting to do is to re-package the “product”, and do more of a soft-sell approach. They are still selling the same old snake oil. There is a method to their madness. They are actually being more devious in their approach, not more honest. In the end, though, it won’t matter. They’ve already lost – they simply don’t know it yet.

  111. Neil McEvoy says:
    September 16, 2010 at 8:12 am (Edit)

    tallbloke,

    No, no, no, it was Labour’s Denis Howell, amiable old duffer and ex-football ref.

    Neil, and Neil Jones and anyone else who spotted my gaffe; Mea Culpa. :-)

  112. I have had a quick look at the report (“working document”). Although mostly generic (about changing people, not specific to climate) it’s a pretty frightening document but maybe you should all read it too – know your enemy!

    http://coinet.org.uk/sites/coinet.org.uk/files/Communicating_climate_change_to_mass_public_audiences_0.pdf

    Please address all correspondence to:
    Dr Adam Corner
    School of Psychology
    70 Park Place
    Cardiff University
    CF10 3AT
    Tel: 02920 870837
    Email: corneraj@cardiff.ac.uk

  113. Skeptic Tank says:
    September 16, 2010 at 10:05 am

    Didn’t that used to be called propaganda?

    Oh, it still is.

    No, it is not. It is called “education” these days.

  114. Chris B says

    I’m corrected – partially. He was threatened to be brought to Rome in chains, excommunicated, and thrown into a dungeon unless he recanted -unless he went to Rome voluntarily. Naturally, under such threat, he recanted.. His father, as with many considered heretics, was tortured and burnt, so he knew it was no empty threat.

    i doubt such punishments would happen to superior scientific minds today. The sanctions for such reprobates are more subtle

  115. fantastic.! Hope you don’t mind but i have put that as my signature on Netweather.tv
    a English weather site.
    Every sceptic should too,nail your colours to the mast and be proud!

  116. Stefan says:
    September 16, 2010 at 8:01 am

    Maybe we are “thinking the wrong thoughts”…..

    Feeling despair? Feeling lack? Feeling like you need to conserve your weak energies?

    Choose creativity. Choose excitement. Choose hope.
    ________________________________________________________
    Choose getting out into the light of the life giving sun. Depression has been linked to not enough sunlight.

    “According to a new study, a lack of sunlight has been linked to reduced cognitive function in people who suffer from depression. For their study, scientists used weather data from NASA satellites to measure sunlight exposure across the United States. They were then able to link this information to the prevalence of cognitive impairment in depressed people. The scientists say their finding suggests that lack of sunlight may not only affect mood, but thinking as well. “

    That is the cure for the Warmistra, MORE sunlight!!! B
    y denying the effects of the sun they have muddled their thinking and now this new study PROVES it. Hurry we must move Jones, Mann, Gavin and the others into the direct sunlight to cure their condition. Perhaps a couple of weeks in the Sahara, with no clothes of course, will cure their condition of “SUN DENIAL”

  117. Mike Jonas says:

    having read the document in persuaion its quite a ribald suggestion at the end – to “encourage public demonstrations of frustration”

    This got me several years ago at the g8 meeting here in London where the riot police were quite heavy handed on the climate camp. Surely the climate camp were thoroughly condoning government propaganda, and ought therefore to have been treated with some privilege?

  118. Professor Paul Hoggett is helping to organise the conference, he said, “We will examine denial from a variety of different perspectives – as the product of addiction to consumption, as the outcome of diffusion of responsibility and the idea that someone else will sort it out and as the consequence of living in a perverse culture which encourages collusion, complacency, irresponsibility.”
    =================
    The Scientific Method, seems to be missing from his examination, as a cause for “denial”. This may be a symptom of his “living in a perverse culture which encourages collusion, complacency, irresponsibility.”
    As I don’t understand what “perverse”, implies, maybe it should be defined.
    Possibly during the conference?
    As a break, to recharge emotions?

  119. OLS 58100: Communicating Global Climate Change (Course no longer
    offered)

    Purdue University
    Approved courses in Great Issues in Science:
    B.S. Degree Requirements: College of Science
    (For students entering Fall 2007 and later)

    Course Description: Society as a whole, particularly in the United
    States, has appeared not to be deeply concerned about global warming
    until late, and as a result, has been slow to act on urgent warnings
    from the science and advocacy communities. If the science of global
    warming is clear – why has society been slow to embrace the challenge
    and combat the problem?

    https://www.science.purdue.edu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&catid=56:uncategorized&id=275:approved-courses-in-great-issues-in-science

  120. TJA says:
    September 16, 2010 at 8:57 am

    Isn’t there some substance that they could put in the water to lower people’s facility for critical thinking? Maybe the Kool-Aide that they have been drinking?
    _____________________________________________________________

    Nope it is the lack of sunlight.

    Darkness Linked To ‘Brain Drain’ Effect of sunlight exposure on cognitive function among depressed and non-depressed participants:
    Shia T Kent, Leslie A McClure, William L Crosson, Donna K Arnett, Virginia G Wadley and Nalini Sathiakumar

  121. Steven Goddard had a good post on telling the WHOLE truth at
    The Big Lie that applies here.

    I took some time to contemplate whether our thinking was also not effective because we were being ted by the warmists half truths. Yes maybe. I posted:

    wayne says: September 16, 2010 at 9:39 am

    Yes, the missing half of the truth. Many do have a consistent habit there. Much like speaking and drawing conclusions of radiation internal to a system heating without nary a mention of the cooling that took place where that radiation came from in the first place!

    That same half truth causes problems in a discussion of the question:
    “Can non-nuclear generated e/m radiation of any frequency created internal to a system EVER warm the system?”
    (yes’es are asked to please explain how conservation of energy is preserved)

    I agree that we also been led to ask the wrong questions, getting away from basic science.

  122. #
    #
    Enneagram says:
    September 16, 2010 at 9:13 am

    Seriously: It is evident that the manufacturers of alternative energy sources have a share in this global warming scam, but, are the technologies already available ? I think they are not, so what’s is the hurry, anything else perhaps, like avoiding an oil price decrease because of the big oil deposits recently found ?
    ___________________________________________________

    Actually it may be the new generation of mini nuclear power plants

    This model is Size in meters – 1.5w x 2.5h

    “John Deal, the Hyperion CEO, says that such micro nuclear reactors should cost about $25 million each. In the U.S., where people spent more energy than in other parts of the world, such a reactor should be able to deliver power to only 10,000 households, for a cost of $2,500 per home. But in developing nations, one HPM could provide enough power for 60,000 homes or more, for a cost of less than $400.” http://www.zdnet.com/blog/emergingtech/a-micro-nuclear-reactor-in-your-garden/1089

    Anthony was saying in an earlier post his July 2010 energy bill was $620.16. My bill has been over $400 on occasion so a $3-4000 per home total cost looks really good to me. The only problem is all the government red tape. SIGHHhhhh

  123. Presumably this group will get together in a year or so to ‘educate’ people how to keep warm using ‘alternative energy sources’ when, as Prof H. Svensmark’s findings come to fruition. See his paper – When the Sun Sleeps”.

  124. #
    #
    hunter says:
    September 16, 2010 at 9:15 am

    Another example of how CO2 obosession lowers the intellignece and increases the gullibility of those obsessed.
    It is long past time to reign in this popular mania, before it deteriorates from merely silly to actually dangerous.
    __________________________________________
    They are after your wallet. They have always been after your wallet (and your freedom) so it has always been dangerous.

    Obama’s Science Czar’s Book says it all

    From: 1973 book “Human Ecology: Problems and Solutions”

    “A massive campaign must be launched to restore a high-quality environment in North America and to de-develop the United States. De-devolopment means bringing our economic system (especially patterns of consumption) into line with the realities of ecology and the global resource situation. Resources and energy must be diverted from frivolous and wasteful uses in overdeveloped countries to filling the genuine needs of underdeveloped countries.”

    That would be the Global Warming/Environmental Campaign started in 1972 at the UN First Earth Summit.

    “The need for de-development presents our economists with a major challenge,” they wrote. “They must design a stable, low-consumption economy in which there is a much more equitable distribution of wealth than the present one. Redistribution of wealth both within and among nations is absolutely essential, if a decent life is to be provided for every human being.”

    That would be the UN Agenda 21 otherwise known as “sustainability”

  125. Enneagram says:
    September 16, 2010 at 8:50 am

    What the heck is an eco-psychologists?

    Obviously they are advanced individuals that help people. People who have trouble talking to plants. People who feel rejected after hugging their tree. People out of touch with their inner green. :-}

  126. Robert of Ottawa says:
    September 16, 2010 at 9:29 am

    It sounds like something from Mao’s cultural revolution….
    _______________

    Of course it does. Google Maurice Strong and his cousin Anna who was buried in China with great ceremony.

    When they speak of
    “greater public engagement with the policy process”

    They are talking of the UN run NGOs like Greenpeace, WWF, Friends of Earth, not the “Bilderbergers unwashed masses” like us.

  127. Dear moderator:

    Not sure what you think I should have flagged as sarcasm. The part about being good jurors or the part about the legal cases. The Katrina case is real–Comer v. Murphy Oil in Mississippi, I think–and there are other cases out there, too. And I really do think they want compliant jurors to win lots of damages. No sarcasm there, either.

  128. P Wilson,
    Could you point out where you read the information about Galileo’s father, and the threats made to get him to agree to come to Rome. I’m surprised it wasn’t mentioned in the Wikipedia article.
    Thanks
    Chris

  129. Enneagram says:
    September 16, 2010 at 9:36 am

    hunter says:
    September 16, 2010 at 9:15 am
    …..before it deteriorates from merely silly to actually dangerous.
    Do you mean a WWIII ?, it is possible, as judged for the unquenchable and pasionate interests behind, don’t show not a bit of discouragement up to now.
    ______________________________________________________
    “They” are smarter than that. Now a days they are more into economic warfare. Since they control the banking systems (money) in many countries I would expect them to crash the world economies again, although that might not work so well this time. Too many people have figured out “Central Banking” is just another name for organized, government sanctioned theft on a national and international scale.

    In Sept. 14, 1994 David Rockefeller, speaking before the UN Business Council.
    “This present window of opportunity, during which a truly peaceful and interdependent world order might be built, will not be open for too long – We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order.”

    David Rockefeller hosts luncheons at the family’s Westchester estate for the world’s finance ministers and central bank governors, following the annual Washington meetings of the World Bank and IMF, so he is certainly in the position to orchestrate another collapse.

    It is funny how the Fed doubled the US money supply in the spring of 2009 but the money is among the missing and so is the super revved up economy it was supposed to cause.

    “The stock of U.S. money as measured by ‘M3′ money supply fell to $13.9 trillion from $14.2 trillion during the three months ending in April.

    This 9.6% annualized contraction is unprecedented in the post-Depression era…”

    http://www.businessinsider.com/money-supply-double-dip-2010-5

    2008 Money supply total was $831 billion
    2009 Money supply total was $1711 billion
    2010 Feb Money supply total was $2114 billion
    2010 Aug Money supply total is $1994 billion (this is the contraction)

    http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/data/BOGUMBNS.txt

  130. P Wilson,

    I looked up Galileo’s father and he was apparently not burnt as a heretic. He seems to have lived out his life as a lutenist though, perhaps bad enough. I suspect that the source of your information for the purported arrest threats is the same as that of Vinzenzo’s immolation. Remember, Galileo was a personal friend of the Pope.

    Furthermore, although he was a genius who greatly advanced science, and was recognized as such by the Church, Galileo’s contention that the Sun was fixed at the center of the Universe is not accurate either, although he persistently said it was so.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vincenzo_Galilei

  131. Ric Werme says:

    “It’s been posted to Tips & Note four times. The URL for the paper has been posted there twice.”

    Ric, sorry, I thought it was important.

    John.

  132. al says:
    September 16, 2010 at 10:53 am

    hmm, all i can say is that my local weather here in Sacramento has been much cooler than usual the past 2 years or so…

    when they had a hot spell around Wash DC earlier in the year the media were falling all over themselves about “make sure you drink plenty of water”(after all OMG its going to be 100 degrees!!)..,…
    would be interesting to hear from honest people from the Wash D.C. area if the media overstated that as usual, to fit their agenda…
    _________________________________________________________-
    I am south of DC by 300 miles and inland by about 200 miles inland. (central North Carolina)

    Our max temp this summer was one day in July at 100F. In the three month period Jun, July and August we had only 12 days over 95F and only 34 days over ninety for a total of 47 “hot” days. Considering we had 17 days over 90F and two days at 98F in May of 2004 compared to only four days at 91 for this May, I considered this a very mild summer. We did have a nice bit of rain this summer too.

    Chis in Norfolk VA might be able to give you a better idea of what the DC weather was lik, but it wasn’t a heat wave here.

  133. Chris B says:
    September 16, 2010 at 4:15 pm

    you could try this

    and find the section about Galileo pages 25-32. It has the official summons and Galileo’s reply. The entire book by Russell is quite an intersting resource for , written in 1932 – certainly before modern wiki revisionism.

    However, this battle between deduction from nominally self evident axioms (in his day, the theological position -in ours the theory of global warmng) and induction and the experimental method seems as old as history. where theories reign supreme over facts represent a sort of anti rationality it can easily put science as knowledgde and understanding into abeyance.

    u.k.(us) says:
    September 16, 2010 at 3:06 pm

    It is very disappointing to see a so called professor – Hoggett – using such vague college cafeteria rhetoric. I used to be penalised for writing such blather in essays.

  134. Citizens of Earth, you’re Global Warming thoughts have not been pure enough.
    As a direct result, the Earth has failed to warm, and it’s all your fault.
    You must turn from your ways, or the climate will ultimately be disrupted, the weather go stark raving nuts, and the Earth will shatter into another Asteroid Belt.
    Only the pure of thought can go on to Mars, the Mother Planet.

  135. You know I laughed out loud, when I read about Orwell’s ‘Thought Police of Oceania’, many, many years ago. An absolutely crazy notion.

    I’m not laughing now…..

    .

  136. “…mass public communications aimed at increasing concern about climate change…”

    How about “mass public communications aimed at increasing debate and informed discussion”

  137. PiperPaul says: “Perhaps re-education camps will be next.”

    No. Re-education camps here will not happen. Too expensive. They will be outsourced to India or China.

    The following would be a great idea for a sit-com:
    You are in a re-education camp in India. You will be required to take a test before you can be released. You have just asked a simple question to explain something that will be on the test. The teacher holds a three-ring binder, and begins to look through it to answer your question. The teacher is a little hard to understand. Finally, he finds the page he was looking for, looks you straight in the eyes, and asks “Have you unplugged the telephone cord, and then plugged it back in?”

  138. A philosopical system that started out with the brain-cracking constructs of Kant, Hegel…….. The mind numbing writings of Marx and Engels…….Communism,.whose rallying cry before WW II was “Capitalism leads you to the poorhouse”. Who claimed that all men would have prosperity under their SCIENTIFICALLY structured society……..when that was shown to be patently false, the rallying cry became “Capitalism leads you to war”………The communist movement in America died when the National Socialists invaded Poland and the USSR………You know that a movement is dead when the rallying cry became “Capitalism despoils the countryside”………..paraphrased Ayn Rand in her book ” For The New Intellectual”

    She didn’t foresee the Movement seizing the CAGW agenda, but warned they are masters of propagana. This is their death throes.

    Bill Whittle of PJTV.com had it right when he said that they know that this President is not just a once in a decade, or once in a lifetime opportunity……He is a once in a forever, last shot opportunity for the collectivists to enact their agenda.

  139. Btw. It’been very cool in central Florida this year, with PM thunderstorms and clouds and nice eve temps about 95% of the time. The lake waters have stayed cool all summer too, from all the rain.

  140. This emotional appeal by psychologists isn’t new. It’s been tried before.
    The precedent was set by Peter Pan’s campaign to save Tinkerbell:

    http://www.elook.org/literature/jmbarrie/the-adventures-of-peter-pan/216.html

    From J.M. Barrie’s Adventures of Peter Pan, Ch. 13:
    ….she thought she could get well again if children believed in fairies.
    Peter flung out his arms…….. he addressed all who might be dreaming of the Neverland……..
    “Do you believe?” he cried.
    Tink sat up in bed almost briskly to listen to her fate.
    She fancied she heard answers in the affirmative, and then again she wasn’t sure.
    “What do you think?” she asked Peter.
    “If you believe,” he shouted to them, “clap your hands; don’t let Tink die.”
    Many clapped.
    Some didn’t.

  141. If these people weren’t serious and in positions of power this would be a real scream. They are seriously delusional.

  142. It’s still a real scream. Idiots in positions of power are funny. Of course they can still do a lot of damage but so can the clever ones.

  143. We might think more about this so called problem if claims made were not so alarmist and prone to so many errors. But then the problem would simply go away.

  144. “…(through, for example, lobbying decision-makers and elected representatives, or participating in demonstrations)…”

    As they seem to be encouraging demonstrations, how about we “denialists” get together and demonstrate at this conference?

  145. “We will examine denial from a variety of different perspectives – as the product of addiction to consumption, as the outcome of diffusion of responsibility and the idea that someone else will sort it out and as the consequence of living in a perverse culture which encourages collusion, complacency, irresponsibility.”

    How about “when the suits hijacked the environmental movement we knew something was amiss”

  146. Chris B says:
    September 16, 2010 at 4:37 pm

    P Wilson,

    I looked up Galileo’s father and he was apparently not burnt as a heretic. He seems to have lived out his life as a lutenist though, perhaps bad enough.

    “A lutenist spends half his time tuning the lute and the other half playing out of tune.”

  147. “”Professor Paul Hoggett is helping to organise the conference, he said, “We will examine denial from a variety of different perspectives – as the product of addiction to consumption, as the outcome of diffusion of responsibility and the idea that someone else will sort it out and as the consequence of living in a perverse culture which encourages collusion, complacency, irresponsibility.””

    Professor, you’ve missed something out ie Denial is the outcome of looking at the scientific evidence for harmful climate change and finding it shallow, hyped up deliberately manipulated and misrepresented to meet a political agenda.

    What you should be looking at is the psychology of more righteous then thou, fascistic control freaks who’s unswerving religious devotion to their cause blinds them to even considering that their crusade to save mother earth is scientifically groundless and based purely on fear mongering group think.

  148. TinyCO2 says:
    September 16, 2010 at 1:07 pm

    “Come on guys, read the report!

    http://coinet.org.uk/sites/coinet.org.uk/files/Communicating_climate_change_to_mass_public_audiences_0.pdf

    It actually urges the sorts of honesty we’ve been demanding.”

    But chances are that what you’ll get from DECC is no better than the ‘honesty’ in the official UK enquiries into the Climate-gate e-mails.

    No UK Government (neither the last lot nor the current crew) will risk commissioning research, reviews, call them what you will, which might disclose the uncertainties behind the ‘settled science’ on which they have based their policies.

    They don’t want to know in case what they find means they have to backtrack, particularly if it means admitting that some current and/or previous government spending has be misguided or, worse still, if it means falling out with the ‘green’ lobby.

    That is why none of them has the guts to say:

    “Hang on – what if the science isn’t settled? What if it’s a little bit wrong? What if it’s a whole lot wrong?

    “Shouldn’t we try to get an impartial view before we take decisions which could cost this country its energy security, its economic security, its national security?

    “Shouldn’t we think through the balance of risk, to evaluate the effects of proposed policies on these security areas:
    – if AGW is happening and will be as bad as fast as climate scientists tell us;
    – if it is happening but won’t be as bad or as fast, so that perhaps we have longer to develop strategies and technologies to counter it, or don’t need to implement some of the most extreme ideas (particularly the most expensive ones) around today;
    – if climate change is happening, and needs to be planned for, but the anthropological element is so negligible that carbon management/reduction policies are frankly irrelevant?

    “And shouldn’t we do this before we commit to more major expenditure from our limited post-recession resources in case it could be money down the drain?”

    I’d like to hope that one of the Parliamentary Select Committees has more courage, but I’m not holding my breath.

  149. P Wilson,

    Thank you for the link. There is still no evidence of death threats nor threats of chains other than Bertrand Russel getting the chronology wrong regarding Galileo’s age, state of health etc., etc. Surprisingly, rather than using a citation Mr. Russell simply states “as everyone knows,……….” Reminds me of the CAGW consensus.

    No mention of Galileo’s father being executed nor mention of Galileo being threatened with execution. The only execution mentioned was the execution of a decree. Easy mistake I suppose. Galileo wrote the brilliant book, Two New Sciences, while under “house arrest”.

    However, it should be pointed out that the sun is still not the center of “the world” nor “immovable”.

    Certainly the majesterium (sp?) of the Church erred badly enough in the handling of Galileo, but not in the manner that is believed by a consensus.

  150. “We Are Thinking The Wrong Thoughts.” These arrogant b{self-snip} s are so close to it, they can’t actually see how utterly communistic and totalitarianist statements like that are. Anyone with any sense (and awareness of history) would run a mile from anyone using such language. Thought Police indeed.

  151. “Let us make sure all of this nonsense is exposed as much and as publicly as possible, and that the incompetents involved are given as much chance as possible to put their foot in it……..”

    Why not take a page from their own book (“lobbying decision-makers and elected representatives, or participating in demonstrations”) and crowdsource a demonstration at their own conference – an anti-propoganda demonstration, with placards like “No Brave New World” and such. Then move on to the political offices. The press would have a ball covering it I predict…

  152. I was once proud that my country, New Zealand, separated Church and State some decades ago. Sadly, and I hang my head in shame, we have a new State religion which tithes every citizen without exception. The new religion is known as ETS which I suspect is an acronym for Electronic Transfer of all income to the State. Whatever the clumsy acronym stands for, the new High Priest is the Prime Minister himself, to be referred to hereafter as ‘Zadoc’.
    Fact, once again, is way stranger than fiction!

  153. I used to hate shearing hoggetts (next growth stage up from lambs) when I was down on the farm – jumpy, twitchy, little sods, none of them ever demonstrated any sort of sense and were exhausting to work with… Oh, sorry, you are talking about PROFESSOR Hoggett. I didn’t quite catch that, but is there a difference?

  154. striving for authenticity.

    An ecopsychologist starts his day wearing his green, organic cotton, free trade boxers. He had his weekly brief shower on Thursday. Tomorrow he remembers he will flush the toilet once. He will have those panties in a bunch by 10 o’clock when his patient asks if they will validate his parking ticket. How dare a human move around using an auto.

  155. Chris B says:
    September 16, 2010 at 9:36 am
    Dennis Nikols, P. Geol. says:
    September 16, 2010 at 8:50 am

    “If you can find any official “Roman Church” teaching, or, any “Prince of the Roman Church” making a statement approaching the Marxist teaching of the end justifying the means, I will eat my words.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_exstirpanda

    Ad extirpanda (named for its Latin incipit) was a papal bull, promulgated on May 15, 1252, by Pope Innocent IV, which explicitly authorized (and defined the appropriate circumstances for) the use of torture by the Inquisition for eliciting confessions from heretics.

    Bon apettit!

  156. old engineer says:
    September 16, 2010 at 10:35 am
    I know readers of WUWT like to keep their facts straight. George Orwell’s most famous book was Animal Farm, a parody of the rise of communism in Russia. What is being decribed in this post is more like Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World. With Big Brother watching everyone. It has been a long, long, time since I read Brave New World, but as I recall the protaganist was in charge of shoe production statistics. His job was to show that shoe production always increased. But, as he admitted to himself, he had no idea whether shoe production was rising, or indeed, if any shoes were produced. At least that’s the way I remember it.

    The book was supposed to take place in the 25th century C.E. Looks like we are getting there a lot quicker

    From one old engineer to another – I couldn’t have named the author of Animal Farm to save my life but I’d have connected “1984” with Orwell in an eyeblink. “Big Brother” by the way, appeared in Orwell’s “1984” not in Huxley’s “Brave New World”. This situation is more Orwellian as his future world used fear and withholding of truth to control the masses while Huxley’s used pleasure and information overload to control the masses. We here now are definitely being denied the truth and manipulated with fear – totally Orwellian.

  157. Dave Springer,

    Touche!

    Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.

    I stand corrected and should have known better than to make the “all or nothing” claim, since with almost all absolutes there are exceptions.

    The feeble excuse I make for the AD 1252 Bull Ad Extirpanda is that the Pope made his response following the murder of an Inquisitor. Clearly he was morally in error.

    Technically speaking it had to be P Wilson who found the exception for me to eat my words, but since I’m hungry anyway I will munch away right down to the vowels.

    Thanks
    Chris

  158. It’s gratifying to see that these two pseudo-scientific fields, psychiatry and global warming research, have finally hooked up with each other.

Comments are closed.