All the years I’ve been in TV news, I’ve observed that every story has a tipping point. In news, we know when it has reached that point when we say it “has legs” and the story takes on a life of its own. The story may have been ignored or glossed over for weeks, months, or years until some new piece of information is posted and starts to galvanize people. The IPCC glacier melt scandal was the one that galvanized the collective voice that has been saying that the IPCC report was seriously flawed and represented a political rather than scientific view. Now people are seriously looking at AR4 with a critical eye and finding things everywhere.
Remember our friends at World Wildlife Fund? Those schlockmeisters that produced the video of planes flying into New York with explicit comparisons to 9/11?
Well it turns out that the WWF is cited all over the IPCC AR4 report, and as you know, WWF does not produce peer reviewed science, they produce opinion papers in line with their vision. Yet IPCC’s rules are such that they are supposed to rely on peer reviewed science only. It appears they’ve violated that rule dozens of times, all under Pachauri’s watch.
A new posting authored by Donna Laframboise, the creator of NOconsensus.org (Toronto, Canada) shows what one can find in just one day of looking.
http://nofrakkingconsensus.blogspot.com/2010/01/more-dodgy-citations-in-nobel-winning.html
Here’s an extensive list of documents created or co-authored by the WWF and cited by this Nobel-winning IPCC AR4 report:
- Allianz and World Wildlife Fund, 2006: Climate change and the financial sector: an agenda for action, 59 pp. [Accessed 03.05.07: http://www.wwf.org.uk/ filelibrary/pdf/allianz_rep_0605.pdf]
- Austin, G., A. Williams, G. Morris, R. Spalding-Feche, and R. Worthington, 2003: Employment potential of renewable energy in South Africa. Earthlife Africa, Johannesburg and World Wildlife Fund (WWF), Denmark, November, 104 pp.
- Baker, T., 2005: Vulnerability Assessment of the North-East Atlantic Shelf Marine Ecoregion to Climate Change, Workshop Project Report, WWF, Godalming, Surrey, 79 pp.
- Coleman, T., O. Hoegh-Guldberg, D. Karoly, I. Lowe, T. McMichael, C.D. Mitchell, G.I. Pearman, P. Scaife and J. Reynolds, 2004: Climate Change: Solutions for Australia. Australian Climate Group, 35 pp. http://www.wwf.org.au/ publications/acg_solutions.pdf
- Dlugolecki, A. and S. Lafeld, 2005: Climate change – agenda for action: the financial sector’s perspective. Allianz Group and WWF, Munich [may be the same document as “Allianz” above, except that one is dated 2006 and the other 2005]
- Fritsche, U.R., K. Hünecke, A. Hermann, F. Schulze, and K. Wiegmann, 2006: Sustainability standards for bioenergy. Öko-Institut e.V., Darmstadt, WWF Germany, Frankfurt am Main, November
- Giannakopoulos, C., M. Bindi, M. Moriondo, P. LeSager and T. Tin, 2005: Climate Change Impacts in the Mediterranean Resulting from a 2oC Global Temperature Rise. WWF report, Gland Switzerland. Accessed 01.10.2006 at http://assets.panda.org/downloads/medreportfinal8july05.pdf.
- Hansen, L.J., J.L. Biringer and J.R. Hoffmann, 2003: Buying Time: A User’s Manual for Building Resistance and Resilience to Climate Change in Natural Systems. WWF Climate Change Program, Berlin, 246 pp.
- http://www.panda.org/about_wwf/what_we_do/climate_change/our_solutions/business_industry/climate_savers/ index.cfm
- Lechtenbohmer, S., V. Grimm, D. Mitze, S. Thomas, M. Wissner, 2005: Target 2020: Policies and measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the EU. WWF European Policy Office, Wuppertal
- Malcolm, J.R., C. Liu, L. Miller, T. Allnut and L. Hansen, Eds., 2002a: Habitats at Risk: Global Warming and Species Loss in Globally Significant Terrestrial Ecosystems. WWF World Wide Fund for Nature, Gland, 40 pp.
- Rowell, A. and P.F. Moore, 2000: Global Review of Forest Fires. WWF/IUCN, Gland, Switzerland, 66 pp. http://www.iucn.org/themes/fcp/publications /files/global_review_forest_fires.pdf
- WWF, 2004: Deforestation threatens the cradle of reef diversity. World Wide Fund for Nature, 2 December 2004. http://www.wwf.org/
- WWF, 2004: Living Planet Report 2004. WWF- World Wide Fund for Nature (formerly World Wildlife Fund), Gland, Switzerland, 44 pp.
- WWF (World Wildlife Fund), 2005: An overview of glaciers, glacier retreat, and subsequent impacts in Nepal, India and China. World Wildlife Fund, Nepal Programme, 79 pp.
- Zarsky, L. and K. Gallagher, 2003: Searching for the Holy Grail? Making FDI Work for Sustainable Development. Analytical Paper, World Wildlife Fund (WWF), Switzerland
Finally, there are these authoritative sources cited by the IPCC – publications with names such as Leisure and Event Management:
- Jones, B. and D. Scott, 2007: Implications of climate change to Ontario’s provincial parks. Leisure, (in press)
- Jones, B., D. Scott and H. Abi Khaled, 2006: Implications of climate change for outdoor event planning: a case study of three special events in Canada’s National Capital region. Event Management, 10, 63-76
Not only should Pachauri resign, the Nobel committee should be deluged by world citizenry demanding they revoke the Nobel prize granted to the body that produced this document.
Sponsored IT training links:
Join 70-271 online course and improve your 70-294 test score up to 100% using certified 640-460 material.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Think! (12:09:57) :
4. Obama and the Democrats want to introduce Cap and Trade
5. Therefore, Democrats are not Communists.
Logic? Who said all Democrats are Communists in the first place, or even that elected Democrats in Congress support Cap and Trade enough to pass it into Law? I didn’t, and they apparently don’t, if any credence can be given to the “cap and trade is dead” info, the victories against Central Government control tenets, and to common sense. It’s likely going to be the Healthcare fiasco all over again, I’ll wager. Not that this will or would permanently stop all such Statist/Progressive/Communist takeover attempts.
So other than to yourself lost in your own virtual world, who are you talking to and about?
Nevertheless once again, mucho ditto congrats as to your telos. While I really do secretly hope it’s not what it appears to be.
Think!, I believe that you’ll find that you are getting way to much caught up in arguing about word definitions as a complete abstraction, which soon becomes an argument about nothing, since words in themselves aren’t really much of anything to begin with, other than appearances, noises, sensations, and the like. They don’t automatically “carry anything around on their backs”, as the prepostmodern Philosophers sometimes used to say.
Someone with time on their hands ought to set up a website, TrollClimate DOT com
Then any old anonymous blogger get just get on there and spout off about any stupid thing that pleases them or irritates them at that moment.
Bloggers could just argue and flame each other or anybody they choose.
I don’t think the content would be particularly entertaining or memorable, but would avoid wasting space on blogs such as this one resulting from people with nothing to say creatinf content anyway
Brian, have you read Hardin, or anything about him yet?
So who is trolling?
You are, as far as I am concerned.
Real people use real names.
Trolling bloggers just use handles to hide – for what reason I don’t know.
You want to be taken seriously in a discussion with me?
You SAY YOUR NAME and who you are, otherwise, you’re just a prank telephone caller as far as I am concerned.
Don’t like that answer?
TOUGH LUCK, Buster, go engage somebody else stupid enough to get in a discussion with an anonymite
The Newsweek magazine produced a series of videos related to the Presidential Address to the Nation.
Included amongst the commentaries is a presentation by Dr James Hansen of the NASA, on the “energy crisis,” viz
Dr Hansen is about as extreme as extreme can get in his views on AGW.
I’m probably as extreme the other way in my views on AGW as Hansen is on his views.
And where does Dr Hansen fit in with his expertise on “energy”?
Newsweek editors, if you’re going to produce a credible picture of what constitutes the “energy crisis in the USA,” why not have the guts enough to videotape me, for example?
[I’m not just talking to the wind, here – Newsweek staff search the net for content that references Newsweek]
Here we are, State of the Union Address, I got as far as “Climate and Clean Energy” and “lead the world” and so on, I had to turn it of.
Mister President, go ask the Spaniards how to make a Green Economy!
They’ll tell you flat out that to become a foreign aid case faster than you can say Bailout! you should become a Green Economy.
“I know there are, some, who doubt the OVERWHELMING evidence of climate change …”
… for example, the disappearing Himalayan Glaciers, and …
. and, …, um,
…um, there’s a whole bunch more, I can’t name it right now, but it is overwhelming.
The Public is wise enough not to fall for this AGW crap anymore.
Al Gore and Parasites Of Him: Your days of economic wrack and ruin are all gone, you’ve been declared a fraud and a hoax, time to sweep up the mess and get back on our FOSSIL FUEL feet once again!
Think! (11:10:54) : edit
“I have looked into mikelorrey’s claim that bankers financed Trotsky.
It appears to have little academic credibility, and seems to me to be a story invented by anti-Semites – neoNazis and the like – in order to place Jews at the centre of left-wing history. ”
Beyond the fact you’re violating Godwin’s Law, the fact that part of my family is Jewish also negates your rather nasty smear and I’ll be discussing this issue with site management.
The facts are that my statement is supported by the accepted scholarly work of Dr. Antony Sutton in his books, “Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution”(1974), Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development: 1917-1930 (1968), Technological Treason: A catalog of U S firms with Soviet contracts, 1917-1982 (1982).
He was an economics professor at California State University Los Angeles and a research fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution from 1968 to 1973. During his time at the Hoover Institute he wrote the major study Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development (in three volumes), detailing how the West played a major role in developing Soviet Union from its very beginnings up until the present time (1970). In 1973 he published a popularized, condensed version of the three volumes called National Suicide: Military Aid to the Soviet Union, and was thereby forced out of the Hoover Institution.
His work has been endorsed by Zbigniew Brzezenski and Richard Pipes. Hardly what I would call “neo-nazis”…In fact Sutton clearly debunks and denies any validity of the “jewish conspiracy” theory of the bolshevik revolution, in Appendix II of the first book cited, documenting many gentiles, bankers or otherwise, who were involved in its leadership here in the US and in Russia, including many high ranking US government officials..
I hereby demand your retraction and apology for your defamatory and hate mongering accusation..
Mike, stinky little trolling bloggers like Stink! aren’t worth the effort of tying responses to them.
Brian G Valentine
2010/01/28 at 5:24am
“Mike, stinky little trolling bloggers like Stink! aren’t worth the effort of tying responses to them.”
In my experience such grossly defamatory accusations need to be confronted directly, else they will take a life of their own as opponents take up such unchallenged smears as fact… While he appears to be an AGW skeptic in his other internet writings… I’m hoping he values amity among allies enough to retract and apologize for such an accusation against my legitimately arrived at scholarly view of history.
I dunno, Mike, he doesn’t think enough of himself to tie his name (and therefore himself) to his ideas; if he has no self-regard, he cannot have regard for what other people might feel or experience.
He’s just a codename, Stink!, to mouth off anything he feels like to anyone dumb enough to pay attention to him.
What’s the difference between Stink! and a graffiti vandal?
There is none
I don’t have a web log, but if I did I would take the “Facebook” approach to it – you use your real name, and you demonstrate that is truly you.
Who uses aliases? Criminals, that’s who, who don’t ordinarily leave their driver’s license at the scene of a crime they have committed.
I can understand why children and “daters” want to remain anonymous; children shouldn’t be horsing around in chat rooms anyway and “daters” aren’t exactly on dating websites to present a point of view to (possibly) edify.
Brian,
The thing is that its MY name thats being attacked. I know who he is. It didn’t take much to figure that out. He’s not as smart as he thinks he is.
Normal debating rumble tumble is perfectly fine with me. Making criminally defamatory accusations, however, is not.
I dunno, I’ve always taken the point of view, the only thing that can make me look bad, is me, and if anyone reads something on the internet or anyplace else that they don’t like, they can be absolutely certain of the source if it came from me.
Even my most ardent critics (of whom there are numerous) know this
I’ve enjoyed the comments. Thanks so much. Just wanted to mention that I’ve now written a follow-up piece on Greenpeace-generated literature in the Nobel-winning IPCC report.
I’ve also discovered that Dr. Pachauri, the IPCC chair, has written at least one forward for a Greenpeace publication. Which strikes me as rather cozy… Am still trying to work out the ethical/political implications in my own mind. Would welcome your thoughts.
http://nofrakkingconsensus.blogspot.com/2010/01/greenpeace-and-nobel-winning-climate_28.html
All the best!
Thank you Ms Laframboise, you’re a real public servant.
It would be interesting to know, how much um, “fees for professional services” the “good” Dr Pachauri has received from Greenpiece (et al.) for his most enlightening contributions
Similarly for Civil “servant” James Hansen (that makes me SICK TO MY STOMACH that he takes money from these outfits)
At least WWF is doing something to help fight climate change, while you gossip girls whatch rescue actions in Haiti on CNN and wonder what can you do to help. Start by turning your lights off.
REPLY: Hey Mr. Earth hour! Think it will make a difference this year? Click
-A
Is there a sign posted “Please trolls come with a codename and say the first stupid thing that comes to mind”
“I hereby demand your retraction and apology for your defamatory and hate mongering accusation…”
I hereby ignore it.
The book in question, from an unremarkable academic, is useless, unless you want to use it to construct bizarre conspiracy theories, such as those found in your post above, and on Alex Jones’ Prison Planet. We might compare it to something cited by a WGII IPCC Assessment Report.
I haven’t attacked your name. I have attacked your absurd ideas.
Donna L’s and Anthony’s efforts to shed light on climate nonsense don’t need to invent history and conspiracy to make progress. The comments sections often let the blogs down.
Brian, the facts either to dismiss what I’ve said or prove it are out there. Your tantrum about my anonymity isn’t going to make what I’ve said less true, and it’s only your name you’ll hurt by refusing to listen to reason.
Anyone can search the internet for “private property” “hardin” and “tragedy of the commons”, and discover that I am right.
“Tragedy of the commons” – or, How The Pilgrims Discovered Capitalism.
Yes, quite an extraordinary lesson there all right. Thanks.
Donna Laframboise (12:38:52) :
In case you don’t already have this link you might want to check it out.
http://climateresearchnews.com/2010/01/un-ipcc-activist-science-greenpeace-and-wwf-reports-cited-in-ar4/
Since they cite your excellent work, you probably know who they are. Still, others may not.
All this nonsense about “Democrat-Communist Conspiracy” is really laughable!
You can deny Global Warming…
You can deny A/H1N1 influenza pandemic…
You can deny the Ozone Hole…
You can deny that pollution is slowly killing billions of people…
But arguing that all those are Communist propaganda is something that really shows that your brains are fried.
By your reasoning, The Planet Earth is Communist. So you can argue that or pale blue dot is really the Red Planet (no offense to Martians intended).
You can deny Reality, but the Planet and all its inhabitants will not deny your role in the BIGGEST GENOCIDE in Worst History.
You believe that the so-called Communist Regimes killed 100 million people?
The Unregulated and Savage Industrial Capitalism is in the right path to kill BILLIONS (and including non-humans, TRILLIONS)!
Defending the actions that will destroy most Life on Earth is the worst thing a living being could do.
You deserve only mercy.
And you will need a lot of it when the System will finally collapse under its own weight (that is, when Climate Change and Peak Oil will destroy Agriculture and Industry)
Commonsense, I really don’t give a damn what you think anybody “deserves;” the USA isn’t going anywhere unless people who think like you are just ignored, that is how the country was able to progress in the first place.
Luddites like you are just a bump in the road for other people who actually contribute things to the society, and such people have characteristic fortitude to simply ignore the noise from non-contributors such as yourself.
Don’t worry, you can enjoy the products of civilization too; just so you can spit on it
Whatever makes you happy
“Luddites like you are just a bump in the road for other people who actually contribute things to the society, and such people have characteristic fortitude to simply ignore the noise from non-contributors such as yourself.”
Brian:
1) I am not a contributor to USA because I live in Peru, in West South America.
2) I am not a luddite, but an Engineeering student, and I will pass most of my life mitigating Climate Change impacts.
Comments like yours are really pathetic. Only inspire mercy.
Dear earthlings:
Some millions years ago Venusians tried to obtain energy from coal and oil. The Venusian deniers convinced the govenments that CO2 emission were totally safe.
Now they are burning in hell!