Doing the right things for the wrong reasons is a serious mistake
Ottawa, Canada, March 28, 2012: “Earth Hour is yet another symbol of how climate activists have hijacked the environmental movement,” said Tom Harris, executive director of the International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC) which is headquartered in Ottawa, Canada. “Most people do not realize that, when they turn out their lights for sixty minutes on March 31, they are not supporting science-based environmental protection. Participants in Earth Hour are unwittingly helping prop up one of the most threatening scientific hoaxes in history—the idea that carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from human activities are known to be causing dangerous global warming and other problematic climate change.”
ICSC chief science advisor, Professor Bob Carter of James Cook University in Queensland, Australia and author of the best selling book, “Climate: the Counter Consensus” explained, “Science has yet to provide unambiguous evidence that problematic, or even measurable, human-caused global warming is occurring. The hypothesis of dangerous man-made climate change is based solely on computerized models that have repeatedly failed in practice in the real world.”
New Zealand-based Terry Dunleavy, ICSC founding chairman and strategic advisor said, “It’s important not to waste energy, and to generate it as economically as possible in terms both of cost and depletion of natural resources. Those are the right reasons for mass gestures like Earth Hour. However, it is a mistake to promote such initiatives as ‘saving the planet’ by reducing emissions of CO2 when so many qualified scientists do not support the hypothesis that man-made CO2 can or does cause dangerous global warming. As the public come to realize that they have been misled about the reasons for Earth Hour, much of the incentive to engage in constructive behaviour will evaporate.”
In announcing his support for Earth Hour, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon asserted, “We do so [turning off lights] in solidarity with the men, women and children, 20% of all humankind, who live with no access to electricity.”
“If we are going to demonstrate solidarity with those who lack adequate energy supplies, then we need to really feel what they feel, not just turn off a few lights,” said ICSC energy issues advisor, Bryan Leyland of Auckland, New Zealand. “Earth Hour should be renamed Energy Hour and citizens encouraged to use as little energy as possible for 60 minutes so that they can get a sense of what societies without adequate power are actually like. For this is exactly where we are headed if governments continue to yield to climate activists and try to replace reliable, base load generation with expensive, intermittent and diffuse energy sources such as wind and solar power.”
“Climate campaigners will undoubtedly once again cite the public’s participation in Earth Hour as broad support for combating climate change,” predicted Professor Ole Humlum of the Institute of Geosciences, University of Oslo, Norway and author of the popular climate science Website http://www.climate4you.com/. “Some commentators have therefore suggested using as much energy as possible during the hour to demonstrate opposition to the climate scare. A more constructive approach would be to change the name and stated purpose of the program to one based on the realities of science and the world we actually live in. Energy Hour would stand the test of time. Earth Hour, based on misguided climate change fears, will not.”
The ICSC is a non-partisan group of scientists, economists and energy and policy experts who are working to promote better understanding of climate science and related policy worldwide. We aim to help create an environment in which a more rational, open discussion about climate issues emerges, thereby moving the debate away from implementation of costly and ineffectual “climate control” measures. Instead, ICSC encourages effective planning for, and adaptation to, inevitable natural climate variability, and continuing scientific research into the causes and impacts of climate change.
ICSC also focuses on publicizing the repercussions of misguided plans to “solve the climate crisis”. This includes, but is not limited to, “carbon” sequestration as well as the dangerous impacts of attempts to replace conventional energy supplies with wind turbines, solar power, most biofuels and other ineffective and expensive energy sources.
For more information about this announcement or ICSC in general, visit http://www.climatescienceinternational.org, or contact any of the following ICSC representatives:
In North America:
Tom Harris, B. Eng., M. Eng. (Mech. – thermofluids)
Executive Director, International Climate Science Coalition
P.O. Box 23013
Ottawa, Ontario K2A 4E2
Canada
Email: tom.harris@climatescienceinternational.net
Phone: 613-728-9200
ICSC Webpage: http://www.climatescienceinternational.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=393
In Australia:
Professor Robert (Bob) M. Carter, PhD, Hon. FRSNZ
Chief Science Advisor, International Climate Science Coalition
Emeritus Fellow, Institute for Public Affairs, Melbourne
Marine Geophysical Laboratory
James Cook University
Townsville, Queensland, 4811
Australia
Email: bob.carter@jcu.edu.au
Phone (mobile): +61-(0)419-701-139
Phone (evening): +61-(0)7-4775-1268
ICSC Webpage: http://climatescienceinternational.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=394
In New Zealand:
Bryan Leyland, M.Sc., FIEE, FIMechE, FIPENZ, consulting engineer
Energy Issues Advisor, International Climate Science Coalition
Auckland 1022
New Zealand
Email: bryanleyland@mac.com
Phone: +64 9 940 7047; mobile: +64 21 978 996
ICSC Webpage: http://climatescienceinternational.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=395
OR
Terry Dunleavy, MBE, JP
Founding Chairman and Strategic Advisor, International Climate Science Coalition
Hauraki, North Shore City 0622
New Zealand
Email: terry.dunleavy@nzclimatescience.org.nz
Phone: +64 9 4863859 – Mobile: +64 274836688
ICSC Webpage: http://climatescienceinternational.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=432
In Europe:
Professor Ole Humlum, PhD
Science Advisory Board member, International Climate Science Coalition
Professor of Physical Geography, Department of Physical Geography
Institute of Geosciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
E-mail: ole.humlum@geo.uio.no
Phone: +47 79 02 33 00 (department); +47 79 02 33 20 (direct). Fax: +47 79 02 33 01.
Webpage: http://www.unis.no/35_staff/staff_webpages/geology/ole_humlum/olepersonal.htm
The Sydney Morning Herald is asking readers whether they are going to turn the lights off for Earth Hour or leave them on. My answer:
You can send your own to loadeddog@sunherald.com.au. 150 words max. “Earth Hour” in the subject line.
Earth hour is a great dry run for the impending energy crunch to come in the not too distant future here in the UK. Once all our coal fired capacity is ended by legislation from Brussels environmentalists up and down the land will be the first to complain about power cuts as they won’t be able to log onto the various climate related websites which they love to read forecasting the death of the planet.
It’s all about trying to create a warm fuzzy feeling that “you are doing your bit” to help.
At least the act of turning off a few lights is harmless, unlike all the other economically damaging stuff being proposed to combat the non-existent problem of man made global warming.
I thought about turning on all the lights and electrical appliances in my home to mark Earth/Energy Hour, but decided that was a petty response to someone trying to guilt trip me.
If all the many tens of billions of dollars currently being wasted on the West’s ‘climate science’ industry was used instead to provide electricity generation facilities in the Third World, then the problem of so many people being without power would be much alleviated. Any chance of that happening? Absolutely none – there are far too many comfortable lifestyles amongst the CAGW cult leadership which need protecting.
Tim Blair has a great article on this subject, called ‘Come on baby light my fire’.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/…light-my-fire…/story-e6frezz0-.
I shan’t be able to follow his example as I can’t afford to. However, I shall most certainly not turn anything down or off!
There are a lot of power cuts where I live (because of weather intolerant power cables that keep being damaged) so we are forced to do without power for many more hours than one per year. It’s a bloody nuisance! If we didn’t have a stove that burns coal as well as wood, we’d be cold as well as having to do without light and all the other useful things that need power. Perhaps if more people had to do without power for several days in the middle of winter, they’d rethink. Or maybe just think at all.
If we are going to demonstrate solidarity with the 20% of the people who have no electricity we aught to support programs to help them get electricity. That means making electricity cheaper and more widely distributed. All this “feel what they feel” symbolism tends to do just the opposite.
The ICSC is trying to move in the right direction, I wish them well. But I fear the green movement has so dominated “earth hour” publicity that participation will be widely seen as support for reduction in fossil fuel use, increased regulation of coal fired electric generation, and increased use of expensive alternative generators.
Rather than try to change the name of “earth hour” let’s ridicule the whole “feel what they feel” idea. WUWT is already a powerful voice in advocating sensible energy policies. That is how to really help those who do not have access to electricity.
More people will have access to electricity if we “drill baby drill”, produce more coal fired electric generators, build more dams, and build more nuclear plants. Sure, work on research to find greener ways to produce cheap electricity. But we should stop government subsidies that push alternatives into the market before they are economically competitive.
The green movement is a disaster for the poor around the world. Let’s not let the greens get away with these meaningless gestures of support for those they hurt the most.
What the PDREU needs is a harsh winter when all the lights go out for a few days, no electricity to fire up central heating boilers, like it did a couple of years ago, Britain got off lightly this time round, eastern europe didn’t, again! It certainly brings home the importance of modern day living to survive the elements, but then the activists don’t want us to survive, do they? Blow Earth Day, it’s so pointless as it is! Reality checks are so essential for people, I know it’s not pleasant, but how would they feel if it was their son/daughter/mother/father/sister/brother/significant other, on a ife-support machine when the power goes & the back-up generators fail to kick in? If things like this are planned they are nothing more than a feelgood factor, whereas real tragedy has more trauma & effect & significance, although I would not wish it upon Al Gore et al, not so sure it would be reciprocated though!
If all the lights on earth go out then everyone will be delighted!
(I hope it dosen’t apply to vehicles.)
Just thought! we can make a lot of money out of this. We can have an accident in the dark and then sue the organisers!
the watermelon heads don,t know if the lights are on or off due to to much pot smoke in the air
A working link here:
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/come-on-baby-light-my-fire-but-watch-the-cat/story-e6frezz0-1226309663925
Ban Ki-Moon asserted, “We do so [turning off lights] in solidarity with the men, women and children, 20% of all humankind, who live with no access to electricity.”
Far better to light one candle than to curse the darkness. How foolish these world leaders are, and how foolish we are to let them lead.
If Earth hour became compulsory and the power companies pulled the plug, everyone would become much more aware of how much we depend on energy and wouldn’t be so willing to replace it with sunbeams and fairy dust.
Keeping in mind the “sound science” reference, and knowing that we’ve all been watching events unfold for the past decade here that were NOT based on same, I found it interesting that the same problem arose in a different field, that of cancer research.
“But they and others fear the phenomenon is the product of a skewed system of incentives that has academics cutting corners to further their careers.
George Robertson of Dalhousie University in Nova Scotia previously worked at Merck on neurodegenerative diseases such as Parkinson’s. While at Merck, he also found many academic studies that did not hold up.
“It drives people in industry crazy. Why are we seeing a collapse of the pharma and biotech industries? One possibility is that academia is not providing accurate findings,” he said.
Sound familiar?
JimB
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/health/2012/03/28/in-cancer-science-many-discoveries-dont-hold-up/#ixzz1qV753WgX
“Earth Hour is yet another symbol of how climate activists have hijacked the environmental movement…”
…and the environmental movement was itself hijacked from “traditional” conservationists decades ago.
Friends:
Concerning ‘Earth Hour’, the article reports Tom Harris (Canada) saying;
““Most people do not realize that, when they turn out their lights for sixty minutes on March 31, they are not supporting science-based environmental protection.”
And Bob Carter (Australia) saying;
“Science has yet to provide unambiguous evidence that problematic, or even measurable, human-caused global warming is occurring.”
And Tom Leavey (New Zealand) saying;
“it is a mistake to promote such initiatives (i.e. such as ‘Earth Hour’) as ‘saving the planet’ by reducing emissions of CO2 when so many qualified scientists do not support the hypothesis that man-made CO2 can or does cause dangerous global warming.”
But they are all considering the mistaken idea that ‘Earth Hour’ has anything to do with science, reason and/or logic. The real reason for ‘Earth Hour’ is explicitly stated by United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon who the article reports has asserted,
“We do so [turning off lights] in solidarity with the men, women and children, 20% of all humankind, who live with no access to electricity.”
So, there you have it. The purpose of ‘Earth Hour’ is a pointless and futile activity which has the intention to achieve nothing, to affect nothing, and to help nobody, but it may make its participants feel smug that they have meaningless “solidarity” with the poor.
Such activities as ‘Earth Hour’ deserve to be reviled as being the hypocritical nonsense that they are.
Richard
My letter to the editor, published today:
———————————–
Earth Hour has an irony. It should carry the caption “keeping people in the dark about climate”. I’ve had countless arguments with climate alarmists. I always ask one simple question “what is the evidence for man caused global warming ?”. Alarmists always go weak at the knees or run away, because there is no evidence. There is just a shonky theory held aloft by political hot air.
East Timor a poor country who are just getting an oil windfall have decided to make their top priority providing electricity to villages outside capital. To that end they are building a coal fired power station.
When they ask villagers in Africa what they want, 2 things always top the list, electricity, and a school.
At root, the problem with the greenie environmentalists is that they have no experience or concept of not living with the benefits of a developed world civilization and they have no concept of how it works.
Paul says:
March 29, 2012 at 12:47 am
//////////////////////////////////
This morning 3 of the largest UK energy suppliers announced that they were pulling out of Nuclear in the UK. So if there is a pull back in coal and nuclear and no development of Shale Gas, things look very bleak on the energy front for the UK.
Meanwhile in the States, yesterday, gas prices have hit a 10 year low. The States are pushing ahead with Shale Gas and are set to become one of the largest energy suppliers in the world. This development will continue to keep gas prices low in the States and it explains why the US gas industry is campaigning so hard for EPA to effectively ban coal, ie., to give a market for all the new gas that is coming on stream. The low gas prices in the States is helping the domestic gas consumer with their energy bills. Quite a startling comparison with the UK.
The low gas price in the States may also promote new developments in the car industry. The prospects for gas powered cars looks good and these cars make much more sense both environmentally and practically than do electric cars.
I agree that the environmental groups having aligned themselves with CAGW are likely to suffer long term damage to their movements once the CAGW scam is fully revealed. People will be paying for this fiasco for decades to come, and this is bound to cause them to view enviromentalists in general with suspicion.
I have no intention of supporting Earth hour. I will not be switching off any energy to support some pathetic pr stunt. That said, I will not deliberately waste any energy either, but weather permitting, perhaps it would be a good day to do the washing.
Dr Burns says
, because there is no evidence.
—————
The creationists use this argument a lot when referring to The Theory of Evolution. Seems they close their eyes ever time evidence comes along, so as to maintain the appearance of sincerity.
I would also refer readers to this simply excellent comment in WUWT
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/03/10/earth-hour-is-it-worth-the-effort/#comment-918732
and also this link to Ross McKitrick’s great paper on the subject of hypocrisy of Earth Hour
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/03/10/earth-hour-is-it-worth-the-effort/#comment-919241
The comments resonated with me. Having lived much of my life in northern Australia where mothers rubbed liberal amounts of Vix Vapour Rub into their childrens’s open and copiously infected skin sores in effort to both stave of the nightly mosquitoes and in the absence of a rational health service, where a family of 4-5 each lived in one bedroom of a three bedroom house and where there was no hot water, or insufficient solar powerered water to shower, wash clothing or children. And the jerry cans, flown in by fixed wing, filled with diesel instead of for washing machines, store and household refrigerators, mechanics workshop and fans at the school and in the houses, were used to fuel the generator that chugged from sunset to dawn (in the tropics) to power the outside spotlights to keep the sorcery at bay…………………. it truly was a frightening and shortened 24 hours for these people. And the children. Those that owned the small generator and the network of cables and paid for the fuel, owned the [miserable] lives of many.
Donna Laframboise, exposes the trans-national corporations behind the idea of “Earth Hour”
http://nofrakkingconsensus.com/2012/03/26/the-wealthy-corporations-behind-earth-hour/
Celebrate human achievement during Earth Hour and turn on every electrical appliance you can find!
In support of the Gweenies, Aerosmith and, wait for it, Cheap Trick, are currently on their “Global Warming” tour. Cheap Trick indeed.
Economical use of resources and efficient use of energy are always commendable goals. How WELL people use resources is a much better measure of stewardship than how LITTLE is used.
Waste and inefficiency is rarely, if ever, commendable. It is sheer folly to think that using less energy resulting from the high cost of ineffective, politically- inspired solutions will lead to a better future.