Whoo boy. It must be rough out there when CSIRO has to have seminars on how to deal with us rowdy ruffian “deniers”. I’m surprised though, a 15 million budget, and they ask you to bring a sack lunch?
Here’s the text, PDF follows:
================================================
DSE invites members of the Victorian Public Service to a presentation on:
Dealing with climate change denialism with Paul Holper, CSIRO
Popular opinion on climate change often waivers, particularly when the media focus on denialist views and encourage “debates” with climate change scientists.
The Victorian Government, along with other governments in Australia and across the world, rely on the scientific community for advice on climate change and its likely impacts.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is recognised as the international authority on climate change science and denialist views often lack rigor and credibility in comparison.
Paul Holper (CSIRO) will present on ways to approach climate change denialism in a Victorian context.
To register for this event please email: climate.change@dse.vic.gov.au by Friday 11 June 2010
Friday 18 June 2010, 12:00 pm – 1:30 pm (includes question time)
Treasury Theatre, Lower Plaza
1 Macarthur Street, East Melbourne
BYO lunch!
Paul Holper
Paul manages the CSIRO’s involvement in the Australian Climate Change Science Program, a $15 million program supported by the Commonwealth Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency. This program undertakes observations of the atmosphere, oceans and terrestrial systems, as well as climate model development, and projections of Australia’s likely future climate. Paul coordinated the most recent climate change projections for Australia (based on IPCC models), announced by BoM and CSIRO in 2007.
========================================
Here’s the PDF of the poster for this event:
Thanks to David Archibald for the tip.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
They can’t hold any water with their argument, so they resort to declaring State Religion.
Just Unbelievable !. But understandable as the Ozzie public is becoming more and more skeptical by the hour.
Well what do you do when your funding is threatened. But more frightening – what does it say when you truly believe what your preaching.
Well I live in Victoria, and I have worked for the government as a contractor; to declare my interest. It is our job to inform people of the risks involved in climate change. We would be negligent in our duty not to do this.
Several posts have remarked on how Western governments have embarked on a strategy of ignoring the climate science, and have become deaf to anyone who disagrees with their “climate change” policies. This is the implementation of Obama’s latest strategy which was leaked in March:
A leaked document has revealed the US government’s strategy in the UN climate talks.
Titled “Strategic Communications Objectives” and dated 11 March 2010, it outlines the key messages that the Obama administration wants to convey to its critics and to the world media before the UN climate talks in Cancun, Mexico in November.
Top of the list of objectives is to: “Reinforce the perception that the US is constructively engaged in UN negotiations in an effort to produce a global regime to combat climate change.” It also talks of “managing expectations” of the outcome of the Cancun meeting and bypassing traditional media outlets by using podcasts and “intimate meetings” with the chief US negotiator to disarm the US’s harsher critics.
But the key phrase is in paragraph three where the author writes: “Create a clear understanding of the CA’s [Copenhagen Accord’s] standing and the importance of operationalising ALL elements.”
[….”operationalising”? What’s that?]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Text of the leaked document:
Strategic communications objectives
1) Reinforce the perception that the US is constructively engaged in UN negotiations in an effort to produce a global regime to combat climate change. This includes support for a symmetrical and legally binding treaty.
2) Manage expectations for Cancun – Without owning the message, advance the narrative that while a symmetrical legally binding treaty in Mexico is unlikely, solid progress can be made on the six or so main elements.
3) Create a clear understanding of the CA’s standing and the importance of operationalising ALL elements.
4) Build and maintain outside support for the administration’s commitment to meeting the climate and clean energy challenge despite an increasingly difficult political environment to pass legislation.
5) Deepen support and understanding from the developing world that advanced developing countries must be part of any meaningful solution to climate change including taking responsibilities under a legally binding treaty.
Media outreach
• Continue to conduct interviews with print, TV and radio outlets driving the climate change story.
• Increase use of off-the-record conversations.
• Strengthen presence in international media markets during trips abroad. Focus efforts on radio and television markets.
• Take greater advantage of new media opportunities such as podcasts to advance US position in the field bypassing traditional media outlets.
• Consider a series of policy speeches/public forums during trips abroad to make our case directly to the developing world.
Key outreach efforts
• Comprehensive and early outreach to policy makers, key stakeholders and validators is critical to broadening support for our positions in the coming year.
• Prior to the 9-11 April meeting in Bonn it would be good for Todd to meet with leading NGOs. This should come in the form of 1:1s and small group sessions.
• Larger group sessions, similar to the one held at CAP prior to Copenhagen, will be useful down the line, but more intimate meetings in the spring are essential to building the foundation of support. Or at the very least, disarming some of the harsher critics.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You will notice a number of important elements that are missing in this strategy. For a start there is no science involved, and no scientific justification for all these new global warming (carbon dioxide) taxes. Then there is the blatant disregard of any democratic processes. Nobody outside of the political and bureaucratic machine will ever get a say in any of this process. I don’t recall anyone from the WWF or Greenpeace seeking or winning any sort of democratic mandate, yet they are at the heart of this process as are Lord Stern, George Soros and Maurice Strong. Also missing is any idea that carbon dioxide taxes might be morally wrong, be counter-productive, inflict massive pain on the poorest people, lead to unimaginable levels of fraud and corruption, and all without “tackling climate change” in the slightest.
The only “climate change” will occur in our financial climate, and the suffocating bureaucratic climate under which we will all have to live in order to regulate every aspect of our lives so that these carbon dioxide taxes can be extorted from us in the first place.
The document reveals five key objectives:
1.) Brainwash the public about the urgency of the coming climate change disaster. If the MSM won’t play ball, then sideline them and use the internet to carry this message to the public.
2.) Set up a bureaucratic framework to monitor and regulate all activities that generate carbon dioxide.
3.) Set up a mechanism to tax all carbon dioxide-generating activities, worldwide.
4.) Work out an international agreement on how the trillions of dollars generated will be dispersed, and to whom.
5.) Embed this mechanism into a UN Treaty, which will legally bind all countries and their governments to the mechanism for ever. No future elected government will be able to stop paying carbon dioxide taxes because of the Treaty which was entered into by a previous head of state or representative.
By the way, a whole series of inter-governmental meetings are scheduled this year to try and ram this down the public’s throat before too many of the public realise that they are being lied to and swindled on a gigantic scale by their own government.
____________________________________________________________
…Any similarities between the actions described in this document and what you are experiencing at the hands of your Government are purely deliberate.
The “expert” speaker at this conference, who is billed as “the manager of the CSIRO’s involvement in the Australian Climate Change Science” is actually an ex school teacher who works as a CSIRO “Communications Manager”.
“Having a science degree and having taught in a secondary school for some years, Paul became interested in describing and explaining science to a range of people and got a job at CSIRO as a communication manager.”
http://www.csiro.au/scope/profiles/Enviro.htm
If they lie about his title … expect lots more lies.
One would think that as a school teacher and professional communicator he should at least know the meaning of the word “waiver” in his promo.
I had a friend who worked at CSIRO. He was a computational physicist
who loved doing physics.
He had a job at CSIRO. He quit in 1989 (actually I spoke to him in 1989 on
this topic) because there were certain results in this field that more desirable
than others.
RichieP
“The general public have a short attention span, have very little interest in what constitutes good science and are willing to accept the authority of these organisations. How utterly depressing it all is.”
The public probably has no interest in this, but there is one thing they have a great deal of interest in – the economy and how it effects their wellbeing. None of these fantasy CO2 mitigation schemes will ever be completed without destroying the economy completely. Give Chris Huhne the rope to hang himself with, I say, and he will bring down the AGW movement with it.
They have cause to worry for even the MSM are beginning to hedge their bets (They would call it balanced reporting). In todays UK Daily Telegraph, Louise Gray the Environment Correspondent has a big page 3 piece “Met Office predicts a summer of ’76 (i.e. hot) every decade”. So far business as usual for Louise but at the end she has a comment from Jonathan Powell of Positive Weather Solutions “Not long ago the Met Office were saying summers would be wet and cloudy over the next 80 years so it seems like a complete reversal, I would take anything they say with a pinch of salt.”!
The climate change “battle” reminds me somewhat of all those other battles, which will never really be won, but which money and resources will be thrown at hand over fist, because nobody has the strength of purpose to declare them unwinnable, and just walk away – Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan spring readily to mind. How much has all that cost so far, with no real discernable result?
“Friday 18 June 2010, 12:00 pm – 1:30 pm (includes question time)” ??
Is this a “seminar”? Only one and a half hours? And it includes question time!
So that guy has not much to tell…
Sir Rodney to the King of Id “Sire many of the peasants refuse to accept out consensus”
The King “What! Impossible, what do they know?”
Sir Rodney – scratching his head “Many of them appear to have gained knowledge sire.”
“Rubbish – make them accept, I want my taxes – or your head.”
Sir Rodney (light bulb moment) “I’ll organize more seminars, push the media.”
The King “You’d better do something – take it out of the education budget – those damn deniers don’t know what’s good for me.”
National Academies Press put out this paper, which can be downloaded:
‘On Being A Scientist: A Guide to Responsible Conduct in Research: 2009’
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12192#description
‘The scientific research enterprise is built on a foundation of trust. Scientists trust that the results reported by others are valid. Society trusts that the results of research reflect an honest attempt by scientists to describe the world accurately and without bias. But this trust will endure only if the scientific community devotes itself to exemplifying and transmitting the values associated with ethical scientific conduct.’
It seems trust is a key issue, as highlighted in the response from Geoff Sherrington on the cherry-picked Australian Treasury Budget graph. Trust would be difficult to develop in the absence of sound debate.
Public servants are employed under a Public Service [Ethics] Act at either State or Commonwealth level (CSIRO is a Commonwealth agency). They should provide fact [not evidence] based information for decision making.
Australia’s National Competition Policy inquiry (2005), with changes to the Trade Practice Act for government (pg XIV) may be viewed as limiting the current energy market while allowing the government to regulate, legislate and extensively market green energy options through ‘market opinion surveys’ while receiving funds (both grants and employees) in the energy arena.
I doubt private enterprise has the same opportunities. Let alone sending their employees to [in-house] lectures in the absence of attending broader market-based lectures.
http://www.pc.gov.au/projects/inquiry/ncp (go to Inquiry Report link as all others have an ‘error’]
Interesting….
They are inviting people from the Victorian Public Service and expect them to attend without providing a free lunch.
Who is in denial here ?
Peter Miller says:
” A couple of things come to mind:
1. I guess we will soon all be sent off to re-education camps.
….. ”
_____________________________________________________
Too late, too many beers ;-).
I have actually found a copy of the agenda for this meeting:
Dealing with climate change denialism
1. Evidence and why it is not necessary
2. Rubbishing and ignoring contrary evidence.
3. How to get the most out of your temperature measurements
4. Taking advantage of natural disasters
5. Taking advantage of hot weather
6. Make your own hockey sticks: Hours of fun for all
7. Using buzz words such as: consensus, robust, peer-reviewed, unprecedented and denier.
8. Ad-hominem attacks and how to make them really nasty
8.1 If the denier is a scientist he is in the pay of Big-Oil
8.2 If the denier is not a scientist he is not qualified to give an opinion
The existence of such a seminar explains a lot. 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. It explains why the same insults and the same rubbish is trotted out again and again.
Because of my location, I got a Google AD asking me to participate in the CSIRO survey.
Here’s the link for those that didn’t get the opportunity to express their thoughts in this AUD15 Million program.
http://www.cse.csiro.au/coastal-survey
Well, good to see another sign that the huge CAGW hoax is about to be buried. Let’s all keep up the pressure until it’s safely buried 6ft under the ground!
However, this scam was just one arm of the octopus which is trying to get the people or the world to sacrifice their freedom in exchange for peace under a non-elected world government. We must all be vigilant in spotting the next attempt and try to nip it in the bud.
It can get very depressing watching the way the elite try to control the world, but always remember that we are many, but they are few. Without our cooperation their monomaniacal dreams will come to nothing.
So much media bias is with anything AGW but very little is reported the other way.
Politically motivated? Yes, if they want to keep subsities flowing and being on the incrowd to access to government matters.
Pretty hard for government and religion to be separate when the church still has a great deal to loose.
Governments have spent a great deal in the last couple of years and NEED a new tax to help get out of the huge debts. The easiest way is to fool the public into a crisis for the sake of tax money to fight the crisis. By using inadequate and inefficient wind turbines on the excuse of helping the environment, they create a small base of “look at what we are doing to save the planet” hype. The IPCC is a big part of this propaganda machine as an excuse. Does not matter about the science at all, just the ability to have the background to back new policies.
I had to find my own truth of science and had a great deal of garbage to sift to find the answers many of us having been looking for about how this planet was created, why we are here, and how these many systems interact together.
It just happened that climate also falls into this and 95% of it is incorrect.
As mentioned above a Google ad in this post was
“CSIRO Survey
Australia Coastal Survey on Property & Rising Sea Levels
http://www.cse.csiro.au/coastal-survey”
I live in Australia – I took the survey which was fairly set out – and gave every aspect of AGW a serve – but from the point of view of someone who has had real scientific training – and never forgotten it.
I urge all OZ citizens who frequent this site to take the survey. It often gives you a chance to take the “other” option – with explanation. An opportunity to add some sense to the usual nonsense.
“Dealing with climate change denialism with Paul Holper, CSIRO”
– – – – – – –
Pretend and extend will be the main theme of the seminar. The “Big Lie” must be repeated loudly and often.
I’d expect there to be many empty chairs in the theatre. Those occupied will be mostly by hard-boiled warmists seeking to learn the latest methods of psychological warfare and political chicanery that will be used against the skeptics.
This rally of alarmists is entirely about taxation. The economies of
Europe and the Union are about to go into the toilet in a way that will make the dirty thirties look like just an economic “timeout”, and in the end, most of Europe will be owned by China and a big chunk by Russia. The G20 and G8 leaders are so desperate for cash they will promote anything that will force more private wealth into government hands, and by extension, into other, but different, private hands. You are seeing the last gasp of the world’s exchequers scrambling to have the dough when every last euro still won’t be able to buy you a loaf of bread.
OT, but John Stossel (Foxnews ) has a special on tonite examining the whole Green agenda/alt fuels, etc. biz. Should be interesting.
As far as I am concerned, using such demonising terms as “denier” or a “denialist” against individuals, blatantly in the interest of stifling debate, and oppressing truth, openness and honesty, is fascism. Fascism has been defeated before, it will be defeated again. And that includes YOU, Paul Holper.
“Opinion often waivers…” you’d think if the Vic govt was going to squander its funds on this piffle they’d at least get the poster done by someone who can spell.
The spangled drongo above points to something amusing us Oz readers that northerners are likely to miss. Directly under this post Google Ads gives a promo that I first thought one of Anthony’s links. It reads:
Before answering the leading questions the survey recipients are introduce to the sciences with such leading statements as this:
“Scientists are telling us that the sea level has been rising and may continue to do so. For example a recent Department of Climate Change report predicts that the sea level around Australia may rise by about 1 metre by 2100.”
Nowhere is the actually measured rate of sea level rise even suggested…leaving the impression it might be about 1 metre per century.