During David Suzuki’s Q&A on Australian ABC-TV, and WUWT regular Bill Koutalianos puts the fruit fly guy on the spot. Video of the interview follows. Andrew Bolt writes:
David Suzuki proves he’s pig ignorant about global warming
The very first question put to David Suzuki on Q&A last night revealed this warming alarmist’s complete ignorance of the most basic facts of global warming.
Fancy Suzuki not even knowing what the world’s main temperature data sets say about global temperatures. Fancy him not even knowing what those data sets are, even when he is given their names.
The only rational response to Suzuki’s astonishing admission of utter ignorance would have been to say to him: “Sir, you are a phony and imposter. Get off the stage and don’t waste our time for a second longer.”
Read the exchange for yourself:
BILL KOUTALIANOS: Oh, hi. Since 1998 global temperatures have been relatively flat, yet many man-made global warming advocates refuse to acknowledge this simple fact. Has man-made global warming become a new religion in itself?
TONY JONES: David, go ahead.
DAVID SUZUKI: Yeah, well, I don’t know why you’re saying that. The ten hottest years on record, as I understand it, have been in this century. In fact, the warming continues. It may have slowed down but the warming continues and everybody is anticipating some kind of revelation in the next IPCC reports that are saying we got it wrong. As far as I understand, we haven’t. So where are you getting your information? I’m not a climatologist. I wait for the climatologists to tell us what they’re thinking.
TONY JONES: Do you want to respond to that, Bill?
BILL KOUTALIANOS: Sure, yeah. UAH, RSS, HadCRUT, GISS data shows a 17-year flat trend which suggests there may be something wrong with the Co2 warming theory?
DAVID SUZUKI: Sorry, yeah, what is the reference? I don’t…
BILL KOUTALIANOS: Well, they’re the main data sets that IPCC use: UAH, University of Alabama, Huntsville; GISS, Goddard Institute of Science; HadCRUT. I don’t know what that stands for, HadCRUT; and RSS, Remote Sensing something. So those data sets suggest a 17-year flat trend, which suggests there may be a problem with the Co2.
DAVID SUZUKI: No, well, there may be a climate sceptic down in Huntsville, Alabama, who has taken the data and come to that conclusion. I say, let’s wait for the IPCC report to come out and see what the vast bulk of scientists who have been involved in gathering this information will tell us.
See those data sets here.
Like I say, a complete know-nothing, citing false claims:
STEWART FRANKS: In an opinion piece last week you wrote that the Great Barrier Reef was threatened by the increasing frequency of cyclones. Everyone watching and listening can onto the Bureau of Meteorology’s website and see that there is no increase. In fact there has been a decline over the last 40 years and no increase in the severity. Are you not, by exaggerating…
DAVID SUZUKI: That I have to admit…
STEWART FRANKS: …or even just getting wrong, are you not actually vulnerable of actually undermining your very own aim in that, you know, the Great Barrier Reef does have environmental threat, but cyclones ain’t one of them?
DAVID SUZUKI: All right. That was one, I have to admit, that that was suggested to me by an Australian, and it is true, I mean, it may be a mistake. I don’t know.
Nor does David Suzuki know what the hell he’s on about when he’s fear-mongering about genetically modified crops:
DAVID SUZUKI: Well, I mean, that is always the argument that’s made. GMOs are very, very expensive. Now, the people that need this food are not going to be able to afford it. Are we going to just create these new crops and then give them away? I simply don’t believe that’s what’s going to happen. I don’t think it is a generosity for the rest of humanity that is driving this activity.
RICK ROUSH: Actually, we are. I mean, Bt corn technology has been given away to the Kenyan State Government research people for use for subsistence farmers. Monsanto gave away insect resistant potatoes in Mexico over 20 years ago. James is working on lots of similar cases. In cases where there is no economic return, it is, in fact, being given away and they’re not so difficult to develop. When I was at Cornell, we got a gene that was a gift from Monsanto for experimental purposes. We made broccoli plants that were resistant to attacks of Dimebag Moths. A student – one of our students made about 50 transformants in about six months. The great cost of these things are no longer the actual creation of the plant. It’s the regulatory challenges to take sure that you can take them to market, to do all that safety testing.
TONY JONES: Okay, Rick, well we’ll get a response to that and we’ll move on?
DAVID SUZUKI: Well, I don’t have any response. It sounds great. I don’t know.
How in God’s name could people take this man seriously?
===========================================================
Kudos to Bill Koutalianos for asking a simple question. Simon at Australian Climate Madness has put the ABC video on YouTube:
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I just watched a Sun News Media News provocateur, Ezra Levant shred Suzuki,,,OUCH
Suzuki is such a has-been and a creep and a corporate lobbyist all the things he says he hates..
what a f’n hypocrite.
http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/2688685375001
Oldie from the Goldie says:
Bob Tisdale says;
Maroon is an appropriate background color for Suzuki.
What a maroon!
Hang about there Bob, the “Mighty Maroons” are the Queensland Ruby League team and they are pretty good having beaten the New South Wales “Blues” for eight series in a row.
However, the only Suzuki they would know is the one they drive.
Good for you to defend the Mighty Maroons, Mr. Balderson,
but, here’s Bugs Bunny talking about Suzuki (not the motorcycle, heh)
Look, the discussions about GMOs is primarily about the dangers of a small number of MNCs gaining entire control over the world’s seeds. Every GMO is sterile, so you are dependent on the supplier if they wipe out biodiversity for short-term capitalist gain.
Any numpty knows that in-breeding leads to disaster and biodiversity is the key to long term health of life on earth.
As for ‘improvements’, well if they really do improve things then the trials will be designed, conducted and audited by independent bodies, not the Monsantos of this world. Any numpty knows that Pharma companies, GM crop companies etc etc distort trial data in their own favour. It’s happened for years and it gives them a bad name. So outsourcing the key trials is the way to bring the right things to market.
GM shouldn’t come to market unless it solves a human need safely. The shareholders’ avarice is not a human need. They get rewarded if, and only if, their company solves a human need safely.
In many cases conventional breeding programmes are more suitable. It’s not saying GM has no future, it’s saying that Monsanto doesn’t control the global debate, nor the global research. If you say it should, you’re declaring Monsanto to be the IPCC of the GM World, which I’m sure you would all laugh out of court.
Won’t you???
Token alarmist, circa 1950:
What a fantastic find !! Thanks for putting that out for all to see here galileonardo. And two decades later the same alarmist ‘climatologists’ were chanting a small ice-age is upon us, fear… dread… they are unbelievable.
Next we will be hearing something like….
Can’t we all just get along together… lets give peace a chance….
GM shouldn’t come to market unless it solves a human need safely. The shareholders’ avarice is not a human need. They get rewarded if, and only if, their company solves a human need safely.
So you’re saying they are sterile and not safe. Their very sterility is what makes them safe.
“Biodiversity” is a con in the case of our cropped species. Every species of maize on the planet was made by us. Every single one. There is no “natural” maize to drive out.
Wild rice resembles the rice we eat in only the most superficial way. The same goes for all cropped species. Any biodiversity with crops is entirely man-made in the first place.
In many cases conventional breeding programmes are more suitable.
Where they bombard them with radiation and see what happens? How in heck is that safer?
Idiot.
Have a look at this Canadian website. Very informative on the usual suspects. Check down the right sidebar.
http://nofrakkingconsensus.com. Oh by the way true to warmers form, Suzuki has a very expensive house just a few feet above sea level.
Someone should have briefed him before he went on the show. For example, he could have said we have found Trenberth’s missing heat in Australia.
http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/ahead/temps_ahead.shtml
There’s one thing I’ll say for him. He obviously knows nothing about the climate, so maybe he’s better at making motorbikes! I own a Suzuki Vitara but am seriously thinking of selling it, because of the stigma attached to the name1
fear-mongering has proved to be a very ‘worthwhile ‘ gig for Suzuki, both for his ego , which like most climate ‘scientists’ seems to be vast , and for his wallet .
Why should he stop now , especially given no matter how wrong he is his followers are always willing to howl in support ?
Suzuki is not rational, and neither are we apparently. An economist weighs in.
Bob Tisdale says: September 24, 2013 at 7:23 pm
A maroon was also the rocket that called out the (volunteer) RNLI (life boat) crew (frowned on nowadays because of elfin safety and only used if the pager system fails). This one seems to be on a downward trajectory with all force spent.
Jimbo says:
September 25, 2013 at 12:39 am
Suzuki is not rational, and neither are we apparently. An economist weighs in.
Leading climate change economist brands sceptics ‘irrational’
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/sep/24/lord-stern-climate-change-sceptics-irrational
*
Oh, good. I think the whole world is beginning to see who is rational and who is not. The more they object to questioning of their ways, and data and anything else that gets in their way, the more obvious they become.
The reference to “sceptics down in Alabama” is ironic (and oft repeated).
The reality is that UAH are the only dataset showing any warming at all in the last 10 years.
http://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2013/08/23/global-temperature-reportjuly-2013/
On a more serious note, the problem we have is that so few people would know where to find the numbers, or what they are.
Only last week, the Sunday Telegraph referred to “warming slowing down since 1998”.
We need to keep doing all we can to get the real story out there, sending letters, leaving comments, telling friends etc etc.
According to the IPCC, a 15 year period with no warming means nothing… BUT 10 years that averages the warmest ‘since “records” began’ means, well, everything.
IPCC = Intergovernmental Pickers of Cherries Conspiracy.
This interview never happened. Claims to the contrary are contrarian.
It is reassuring to know that the big guns on the other side fire blanks.
Perhaps what is extraordinary about this exchange is the fact that Suzuki put himself up for questioning.
Julian In Wales says:
September 25, 2013 at 2:01 am
If Suzuki is a ‘big gun’ – then I suggest he be decommisioned asap! Maybe CO2 and global warming has increased senility? (uh oh – yet another AGW memed paper could be in the offing….)
Jimbo says:
September 25, 2013 at 12:39 am
Ha ha – but WTF is a climate change economist? (I’m guessing it’s someone who just wants to stick their face in the AGW feeding trough too?)
So, how much was Master Suzuki paid for this appearance?
Okay, just so I can understand the thinking of the writer of this article a little better on the issue of gmo’s…..a nascent industry of the near past 30 years, maybe 40 (?)……….why is it bad to remain skeptical?
Dont feed me the climate change crap BUT do feed me the GMO’s…….is that what I am supposed to get out of “when he is fear-mongering”?
So the gmo industry, as infantile and unknowing of long term anything as climate science, is not to be questioned?
The GMO industry is as old as agriculture.
The modern GMO industry relies on empirical testing, not computer models. There is zero evidence of GMO food harming anyone, ever.
No comparison with climate “science” in any way, shape or form.
rtj1211 says:
September 24, 2013 at 10:54 pm
“GM shouldn’t come to market unless it solves a human need safely. The shareholders’ avarice is not a human need. They get rewarded if, and only if, their company solves a human need safely.”
So you are in favor of Golden Rice.
Nice to see at least one anti GMO person who makes rational compromises.