This entry below is unashamedly pinched from Bishop Hill, who I don’t think will mind, since at the bottom I’m giving a link to him where a raging and somewhat related debate is going on right now.
He writes:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
More scratching of heads among the chattering classes as they try to work out why nobody believes their global warming propaganda – next week they are all jetting off to Norway for a chat about what to do:
We cordially invite you to the seminar Carbonundrums: From Science to Headlines as well as to the ensuing debate New Realities, New Narratives in Climate Reporting, on Tuesday 8th of February 2011 at Litteraturhuset. We will address important questions such as: How is the press reporting on climate change? What can we learn from Climategate? How should we communicate scientific uncertainty? What determines how people perceive climate change?
Panellists include Fiona Fox, Bob Ward, Roger Harrabin, Fred Pearce, Naomi Oreskes and Rasmus Benestad. That’s one very large carbon footprint!
The whole thing will be webcast here.
(H/T Billy)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Funny how this comes on the heels of the Lisbon conference, which seems to be driving AGW proponents like Joe Romm absolutely batshit crazy. Bish has quite the discussion on it here.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“This video contains content from Sony Music Entertainment, who has blocked it in your country on copyright grounds”
So much for entertainment. These people have left already.
pat says:
February 5, 2011 at 9:37 am
Norway in February. Heh heh.
just wait, they will get a very warm spell up there right about that time and POOF! proof of CAGW….
Of course no real skeptics. Since the science is settled, global warming has now become a “communication problem”, or rather an “education problem”. So this is what the focus will be. They have lost the mainstream media, and this is the current crisis that must be addressed. The same theme pops up everywhere these days: “how to communicate climate change”.
How about starting by open and objective science?
Should be an easy fix……
(I will walk down there and have a listen. It is only 3 minutes walk).
THE NEW STRATEGY FOR “GREENS” – PERSONAL AGW BRAINWASHING
This is from a program to be broadcast by the BBC (who else?) on Thursday Feb 10.
“In Denial – Climate on the Couch”
– Notice the title of the program. It’s really very clever. It’s in the best Soviet tradition of saying those who don’t believe in AGW – now separated from “us” (the sane believers) into a group called “deniers” – must be mentally afflicted. Not bad going for six words!
Program details
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00y92mn
Thursday, 21:00 on BBC Radio 4
Synopsis
Something strange is happening to the climate – the climate of opinion. On the one hand, scientists are forecasting terrible changes to the planet, and to us. On the other, most of us don’t seem that bothered, even though the government keeps telling us we ought to be. Even climate scientists and environmental campaigners find it hard to stop themselves taking holidays in long haul destinations.
So why the gap between what the science says, and what we feel and do? In this programme Jolyon Jenkins investigates the psychology of climate change. Have environmentalists and the government been putting out messages that are actually counterproductive? Might trying to scare people into action actually be causing them to consume more? Are images of polar bears actually damaging to the environmentalists’ case because they alienate people who don’t think of themselves as environmentalists – and make climate change seem like a problem that’s a long way off and doesn’t have much relevance to normal life? Does the message that there are “simple and painless” steps we can take to reduce our carbon footprint (like unplugging your phone charger) unintentionally cause people to think that the problem can’t be that serious if the answers are so trivial?
Jolyon talks to people who are trying to move beyond the counterproductive messages. On the one hand there are projects like Natural Change, run by WWF Scotland, which try to reconnect people with nature using the therapeutic techniques of “ecopsychology” – intense workshops that take place in the wilderness of the west of Scotland, and which seem to convert the uncommitted into serious greens. On the other, there are schemes that try to take the issue out of the green ghetto and engage normal people with climate change. Jolyon visits a project in Stirling which has set itself the ambitious challenge of talking face to face with 35,000 people, through existing social groups like rugby clubs, knitting circles and art groups. It wants to sign up these groups to carbon cutting plans, and make carbon reduction a social norm rather than something that only eco-warriors bother with.
And he attends a “swishing party” in London, which tries to replicate the buzz women get from clothes shopping, but in a carbon neutral way. Can the green movement find substitutes for consumerism that are as fun and status-rich, that will deliver carbon reduction but without making people feel they have signed up to a life of grim austerity? And even if the British and Europeans shift their attitudes, can the Americans ever be reconciled to the climate change message? Producer Jolyon Jenkins.
…So there you are. As they’ve lost the scientific argument, the “man-made global warming” liars are now employing a new brainwashing strategy based on the bullying psychology of religious cults.
According to the Norwegian met office
http://www.yr.no/place/Norway/Oslo/Oslo/Oslo/long.html
The temperature will be -1 C on Monday when the participants arrive and rise up to a balmy 1 C on Tuesday during the conference.
Not quite a full bore Gore effect, but it will do.
Naomi Oreskes’ talk is called “Merchants of Doubt”. The title suggests that doubters are making large amounts of money from their efforts. Au contraire, the warmists are far better funded than people like our host blogger Anthony and others like him.
One of the sponsors Fritt Ord is a foundation for the freedom of expression. Fritt Ord means Free Word or Free Speech in Norwegian.
The discussion of the panel seems to be how to best to frame the debate. I’m sure participants like Roger Harabin from the BBC, Bob Ward the global warming PR consultant from Grantham Research Institute, Naomi Oreskes the maker up of the climate consensus myth and Rasmus Benestad member of the famous ClimateGate climate hockey stick graph team will make sure of that.
Freedom of speech, Sure!
pat says:
February 5, 2011 at 9:37 am
There’s not a single tropical resort that would book ’em–they’re completely aware of the record-setting cold that accompanies these types of gatherings and it simply ISN’T good for their tourist business.
/sarc or not to sarc, that is the question!
Please please weather gods give them a winter storm to remember,snow in Copenhagen ,cold in Cancun…..nasty in Norway.Remind these fools who is in charge of the planets climate.
As for the questions
How is the press reporting on climate change? What can we learn from Climategate? How should we communicate scientific uncertainty? What determines how people perceive climate change?
1.Stop biased reporting, air sceptical thoughts/findings
2.don’t lie where others can find it out.in fact don’t bother lying
3.just tell the truth, nothing in climate science is 100% certain
4. most intelligent people know when someone’s trying to pull the wool over their eyes,stop repeating the same old mantra. ie global warming is to blame for every extreme weather event.
Kate says:
February 5, 2011 at 10:49 am
Well, now they’ve gone and done it–blamed Climate for the problems with the climate. How fitting, although I’m not sure why they’d want to admit it is THEY who are “In Denial”. (Now what…they’re going to dig a pit and have an intimate discussion with Gaia while they’re down there?)
/definitely sarc.
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
The recent monologue on WUWT by Haribin can now be put into perspective, and I was right. A serpent in snakeskin clothing.
Perhaps behind closed doors, the Team will be meeting with ICANN officials and find ways to block “alternative blogs” like this one. They’ve got a stranglehold on the Main Stream Media, but to no avail. And thier shrinking list of devotees indicates that “messaging” isn’t the problem. The real problem lies with people shivering from New Mexico to Devonshire who are being lectured about thier carbon footprint. This week, blackouts plagued the Southwest US was temps plunged below 20 deg F. The utility companies could not keep up with demand. Add near record snowfall from Iowa to Boston; a miserable December from the Orkneys to Vienna, and there isn’t much room for the CAGW point of view.
If the trend continues, the Alarmists will demand that the UN give them power to control all fossil fuels- the voters be damned!
Closer inspection of the program reveals that this an invite-only event, and that all Norwegian contributors are staunch warmists of the third degree.
We all know benestad of climategate fame. Member of The Team, regular contributor to Realclimate.
Karine Nyborg is an environmentalist economist, contributing to papers such as: Attracting Responsible Employees: Green Production as Labor Market Screening.
Atle Midttun, professor of economics, author of such gems as:
“we must end carbon consumption as a sign of social status”,
“Two months before the negotiations in Copenhagen, we are afraid that the most probable scenario is that we are entering into the age of idiots. There are signs that the negotiations will not be successful”.
And:
“the current environmental crisis is too good to be wrecked as an opportunity for a new renaissance”
Apart form these three norwegian hyper-warmists, there is the Minister of Environment from the socialist party, who on numerous occasions has demonstrated his dogmatic belief in CAGW.
He is fortunately held back by more sober colleagues in the coalition government towards his daydreams of “green jobs” and a “green economy”.
So there it is.
A collection of activists.
And of course no tickets for dissenting voices, AKA Deniers.
Joseph in Florida says:
February 5, 2011 at 10:19 am
(Do we ever blame the heating on the cooling?)
Take a look at some of the thermometer sites on surfacestations.org. Air conditioner exhaust blowing right onto the site.
The carborundum invitation reads like one to a marketing seminar. What looks to me like another marketing seminar (this time for developing nations) is scheduled for Cairo in June. At the World Conference of Science Journalists the keynote lecture is by the CEO, American Association for the Advancement of Science:
http://www.scidev.net/en/events/world-conference-of-science-journalists-2011.html
Here is a sample of topics. What descriptions I have included are from the program.
The (N)ever Changing Forecast: Can We (N)ever Report Well on Climate Change?
This panel will discuss how to cover climate change when its position in the public consciousness is in constant flux.
Science Oil Spills and Secrecy
(This session produced by AAAS with panelists from the Washington Post, The New York Times, NPR and The American University in Cairo)
Am I a Science Journalist?
In the evolving world of science communication, how do we define a science journalist?
Secrets of the Stars: A Best Practices Panel on Science Blogging
Journalism in the Age of Denial
Denialism has always been defined as “Choosing to deny reality as a way to avoid uncomfortable truth….Is denialism growing around the globe?)
PR and Journalism: A Conversation About Collaboration
Reaching Young Audiences
The Promise and Perils of Investigative Science Journalism
Who Speaks for Science?
What determines how people perceive climate change?
It might be the warmist act of painting themselves into a corner, then proclaiming they know what they are doing.
Such outlandish stunts drive people to perceive the originators of inside-out/upside-down/totally reversed thinking as reality disconnects.
Dogs are now cats, and an F on your final exam is now an A.
It’s cold out there because warming is past tense and Global Cooling is never caused by Global Warming.
Ed Waage says:
February 5, 2011 at 10:54 am
“Naomi Oreskes’ talk is called “Merchants of Doubt”. The title suggests that doubters are making large amounts of money from their efforts. Au contraire, the warmists are far better funded than people like our host blogger Anthony and others like him.”
It is titled after her book. She is trying to get sell her trash before it is rightfully recycled as toilet paper. She is the poster child for why the government shouldn’t write blank checks to universities for “science.”
The only question is who or whom is paying for this get together?
Well they have got to try and melt all that ice up in the Arctic as nature is not doing it for them…
I’ve just realised the British Council are one of the sponsors, well that is a letter off to my local MP. I mean, should we be funding such lavish events during vast public spending cuts here in the UK?
Other sponsors are Oxford Global Media who in effect are just media spinners for hire no matter what their fancy website might say. Jobs for the boys there I guess.
Ed Waage says:
February 5, 2011 at 10:54 am
According to the Norwegian met office
http://www.yr.no/place/Norway/Oslo/Oslo/Oslo/long.html
‘Naomi Oreskes’ talk is called “Merchants of Doubt”.’
She’s the one who wrote the book exposing sceptics for being against totalitarian government. She claimed that sceptics are against the science because they are against totalitarianism. Of course, sceptics have revealed the non-existence of the Jones-Mann-Hansen “science.” Would someone please ask her if she is in favor of totalitarian government? And, additionally, does she believe totalitarian rule is a fair price to pay for controlling manmade CO2?
JP says:
February 5, 2011 at 11:29 am
“And thier shrinking list of devotees indicates that “messaging” isn’t the problem. The real problem lies with people shivering from New Mexico to Devonshire who are being lectured about thier carbon footprint.”
In the USA, the only people recognized as less believable than Barack Obama are the ClimateGaters, including Hansen and crew. How’s Lisa working out for you at the EPA, Barry? Pretty much like Nancy in that Speaker job, I believe.
Why doesn’t Oreskes just send the organisers a PDF summary of her latest ‘Merchants of Doubt’ book and save all the CO2 emissinos involved in her attendance?
Here in Oz we have WWF advertising Earth Hour every night on TV right now. That is fine by me – if they decide that ‘communicating better’ means spending all their money on TV advertising useless gestures then so be it. As they say fools and their money are easily parted.
So, it’s another exotic seminar where more “New realities” = “New Narratives”, eh? Well, it’s not surprising that the Post Normals have doggedly stayed confined within their own infinitely recurring propaganda loop, which they advise us is necessary and without escape once Post Normal Science has set in upon a
personsociety, and therefore necessarily the whole World, too, no doubt. They should know!But, if only for the purposes of
understanding one’s enemiesempathy imagine what it would be like to be a person or group stuck inside the “perception is reality” world, where the only “ends” allowed for people are also the ‘means” = thought control via repeating the “correct” noises, but with the Post Normals also almost always having to try to figure out what the Post Normals themselves should be “thinking” and projecting outward in order to be “correct” and somehow “win” by finally interfacing with the real world. Apparently, never having to “feel falsified” and going only with “what you feel, not what you can prove” might have some drawbacks?