Guest essay by Dr. Tim Ball
The cover story of the November 25, 2013 Canadian weekly magazine Macleans pictures self-appointed Canadian environmentalist David Suzuki.
The caption reads, “Environmentalism Has Failed”“David Suzuki loses faith in the cause of his lifetime.”
Suzuki doesn’t realize he‘s the cause of the failure as a major player in the group who exploited environmentalism and climate for a political agenda. Initially most listened and tried to accommodate, but gradually the lies, deceptions and propaganda were exposed. The age of eco-bullying is ending. Typically Suzuki blamed others for the damage to the environment and climate but now he blames them for not listening to him. He forgets that when you point a finger at someone three are pointing back at you.
Environmentalism was what academics call a paradigm shift, which Thomas Kuhn defines as “a fundamental change in approach or underlying assumptions.” It was a necessary new paradigm. Everybody accepts the general notion it is foolish to soil your own nest and most were prepared to participate. Most were not sure what it entailed or how far it should go. Extremists grab all new paradigms for their agenda but then define the limits for the majority by pushing beyond the limits of the idea. Environmentalism and the subset climate are at that stage pushed there by extremists like Suzuki. Instead of admitting the science is wrong they double down and make increasingly extreme statements, just like the IPCC. It underscores the political rather than the scientific agenda. For example, Suzuki, apparently frustrated that politicians were not listening to his demands for action on climate change said they should be jailed.
Environmental groups grabbed environmentalism and quickly took the moral high ground preaching that only they cared about the Earth. Suzuki set up the David Suzuki Foundation (DSF) with tax benefits that required it to be non-political, but after active involvement in an Ontario election he was forced to resign. His major theme in the election was to push the climate change and alternate energies put in place in that Province when Maurice Strong was in charge of Ontario Hydro, the state controlled energy agency. Ontario is the perfect example of how and why climate energy policies promoted by Strong as Founder of UNEP are a disaster.
The Foundation campaigned on environmental issues most presented in deceptive or incomplete ways. An example was the attack on salmon farming and corrupted research on PCBs and sea lice. This was the focus of an interview of researcher Vivian Krause by Ezra Levant. Another was Suzuki’s parade across Canada pushing extinction theories and claims of DSF Board member E.O Wilson that 3 species go extinct every hour. He never named one. He never listed the plethora of new species found. He refused to discuss the issue and in his visit to schools pre-arranged and wrote a question for a selected student to ask. He promoted threats of global warming, but refused to debate the issue or answer questions. When asked questions on a radio interview in Toronto, he swore and stormed out of the studio.
He hired former Federal politician NDP (socialist party) David Fulton as Director of DSF. James Hoggan has been Chairman of the Board for many years. His PR Company has major alternate energy companies as clients. Hoggan is the proud creator of DeSmogblog a web site that claims it is “Clearing the PR Pollution that clouds climate science” but mostly involves personal attacks on people asking questions. The objective was to denigrate people by creating “favorable interpretations” to the following questions. “Were these climate skeptics qualified? Were they doing any research in the climate change field? Were they accepting money, directly or indirectly, from the fossil fuel industry?” This doesn’t answer skeptics questions about the science.
Their real agenda was disclosed in a Climatic Research Unit (CRU) leaked email dated December 2007 from senior writer Richard Littlemore to Michael Mann.
Hi Michael [Mann],
I’m a DeSmogBlog writer [Richard LIttlemore] (sic) (I got your email from Kevin Grandia)* and I am trying to fend off the latest announcement that global warming has not actually occurred in the 20th century.
It looks to me like Gerd Burger is trying to deny climate change by “smoothing,” “correcting” or otherwise rounding off the temperatures that we know for a flat fact have been recorded since the 1970s, but I am out of my depth (as I am sure you have noticed: we’re all about PR here, not much about science) so I wonder if you guys have done anything or are going to do anything with Burger’s intervention in Science. (emphasis added)
(* Grandia was a former writer for DeSmogBlog who moved there after serving as a research assistant for a Liberal Minister in Ottawa.)
Do as I say, not as I do is the hallmark of extreme environmentalists behaviour. Al Gore is the poster boy for this hypocrisy. It appears Suzuki is only different in scale. They were enumerated in programs by SUN TV Reporter Ezra Levant. They include the familiar list of funding and financial activities and personal wealth accumulated, especially in properties.
A major part of Suzuki’s attacks relate to global warming. His refusal to debate or even answer questions is legendary. He ignores his lack of qualifications on climate, but uses that challenge when it comes to his supposed expertise in genetics and genetically modified food. A possible explanation for his “environmentalism is a failure” claim is a PR move to divert from the exposure of his climate ignorance in an Australian interview. He could not answer questions about information fundamental to any understanding.
Suzuki abandoned his academic career in genetics decades ago explaining why in a 1999 Seattle speech. His concerns related to the internment of his Japanese Canadian family during WWII. Here are his words:
In the exuberance of the excitement over the discovery of new principles of heredity — that seemed to apply across the plant and animal kingdoms — geneticists began to make wonderful, wild statements about the implications of their discoveries. I’m sure most of you know that it ultimately led to what was considered a legitimate area of science called Eugenics.
Some of our most eminent geneticists taught courses in eugenics, wrote textbooks in eugenics, published articles in eugenics journals. Eugenics being the attempt to apply the new-found knowledge of heredity to improve the genetic quality or makeup of human society.
It seems more logical to maintain standing as a geneticist and work to prevent such drifts occurring. Instead he quit and became a tele-evangelist using state television (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) to push his environmental/political agenda.
His television series became his undoing as a classic example of how extremism is its own undoing. It’s why Suzuki’s exploitation of environmentalism, as he defines it, caused failure. Most programs in the series were unjustified, misleading condemnations of different components of society. I identified some of the misinformation in a presentation to farmers in Saskatchewan a few years ago. Afterward a woman told me that a month earlier she would have disagreed with my comments. Now she understood because Suzuki did a program on farming and as a farmer’s wife she knew how wrong and biased it was. Each new program exposed another segment of society to the deception. This created a populace open to and not surprised by the exposure of his hypocrisies. The same is happening to climate alarmism as more and more segments of society are negatively affected. His actions and climate driven energy policies close industries, decimate communities, cause job losses and force business closures, virtually all unnecessarily.
As Suzuki’s campaign to use environmentalism for a political agenda fails he lashes out, blaming others for the failure. It parallels what is happening in the climate alarmist community. The comments and claims become more extreme, but achieve the opposite of their goal. It is necessary to consider the further negative effects of their exploitation and deceptions. What is the damage to the credibility of science? Can we pursue environmentalism with rational, science based, prioritized policies?
Related articles
- CNN mocks Greenpeace’s “Save Santa’s Home” video (wattsupwiththat.com)
- Climate change: Fear based messages don’t work (psychbot.wordpress.com)
- The nature of David Suzuki (macleans.ca)
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
A developer is someone who wants to build a house in the forest.
An environmentalist is someone who owns a house in the forest.
“Most programs in the series were unjustified, misleading condemnations of different components of society. I identified some of the misinformation in a presentation to farmers in Saskatchewan a few years ago. Afterward a woman told me that a month earlier she would have disagreed with my comments. Now she understood because Suzuki did a program on farming and as a farmer’s wife she knew how wrong and biased it was. Each new program exposed another segment of society to the deception.” ~Dr Tim Ball
Let’s remember that Norman Borlaug, the developer of many high yield varieties of grains, considered his work to be the greatest benefit not only to the people, but to the environment. The reason this is so is because far more grain can be grown on so much less land. Farmers in the US now grow 5xs more using fewer acres than in the 20’s and 30’s. This is through the use of tractors, chemical fertilizers, pest control, and new cultivars. This reduces the amount of farmland and increases the yield. Countries where Borlaug went became net exporters of grains, rather than having dearth of grain. Yet nitrous oxide from crops are considered a dangerous ghg.
The same is true of the cattle. The protein and nutrients from milk and beef is essential for growing children, and the cattle reduce the foraging and hunting in the wild areas. Yet the methane from cows is considered a dangerous ghg.
I consider myself an environmentalist because the use of the gifts of grain, fertilizer, mass produced tractors (also considered a source of dangerous ghg), and of cattle are saving the environment and making the lives of people better. To get these technologies and advancements to Africa is a benefit to the people and the land. “Get this to the farmer,” was Norman Borlaug’s passion.
The warmists are losing the battle, because the weather is not playing ball.
In France, we have been freezing for weeks. The people do not see ‘climate’, they see what is actually happening around them. So what they see is the media and politicians bleating about ‘Global Warming’ and the end of the world, and then they see everyone wearing huge winter coats and the fuel bills skyrocketing because of Green taxes.
The weather will kill the Greens, long before the long-term trends in the climate are agreed upon.
No one cares for land as well as its owner.
The insufferable hypocrisy of the enviro-left in Canada is nowhere more evident than in Suzuki’s own state-funded programming (CBC) and the raft of “scientific” programming on, inter alia, the Discovery Channels (Bell Media).
Programs originating with them, on whatever topic, will blithely cite glacier advances and retreats and rises and falls of sea levels – over hundreds and thousands of millennia – without ever exploring or explaining (much less explaining away) such natural effects.
Yet a 0.68C rise in temperature over 150-odd years IS categorically man-made and IS catastrophic, and we MUST be concerned?
And, regarding the note in the Macleans’ article that “Suzuki traces his own awakening back to The Silent Spring, Rachel Carson’s groundbreaking 1962 book.”, perhaps he can share in the blood on her hands for the estimated 50-60 million children who died as a result of the banning of DDT.
What failure? Just look at a few successes:
– We now burn our food and apparently grind up grasslands and other natural habitats for more
– Power plants are now burning wood instead of coal, trees are a blight to be dealt with
– Wind farms can now kill more Bald Eagles and other endangered species
Not to mention the diversion of investment away from energy innovation. Overall a huge success.
This is a dangerous juncture: AGW opinion leaders are in effect blaming the people for the failure of their policies and ideas- we are not worthy. Suzuki is a malicious figure. Seeing him admit even this much failure is wonderful. But he (and his colleagues) are far from recognzing the real source of their failure: Themselves, their ideas and their actions.
Tim Ball,
As usual with each of your many WUWT posts, I felt compelled to read your ‘Climate Alarmist Crying Wolf’ essay.
As I read your essay a thought occurred to me about the source of the ideology of environmentalism which, as an ideological phenomenon, started in the late 20th century. I thought that the diminishing of a culture’s focus on expanding beyond itself results in an inward focus; environmentalism being a culturally internal focus. Is the creation of an ideology of environmentalism a necessary result of the absence of culture’s pioneering focus?
John
Thanks. Maybe I should have been clearer, my fault. What I meant was any movement with all three elements i.e. scientific, political and media backing?
Reblogged this on Power To The People and commented:
The real threat to humanity and the environment are the climate alarmists who condone killing eagles and destroying industries aand jobs in the name of a futile effort to save the earth from the trace gas CO2 that grows plants.
Same effect in Australia. No wonder the Greens vote dropped 30 % in the last election here.
Doug Huffman, I would like to add global in extent?
It takes no great skill or effort to demonstrate that Suzuki is a hypocritical self-promoter who knows very little about environmental science. The man has a carbon footprint that rivals Al Gore’s and has “earned” millions of taxpayer dollars as a result of the podium granted to him by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, while posing as an “elder” with modest needs.
The fact that he is a fraud is totally ignored by Canadian mainstream media who continue to afford him rock star status. This is despite the complete and detailed evisceration of Suzuki’s character and record by Ezra Levant of Sun TV.
It is interesting indeed that Levant’s brutal telling of the Suzuki Story did not result in lawsuits – apparently truth is still a defense in Canada. A sample here:
http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/straighttalk/archives/2013/09/20130929-074617.html
President Eisenhower had it right in 1960 in his farewell address….
Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.
In this revolution, research has become central, it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.
The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present – and is gravely to be regarded.
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.
Eisenhower nailed it….
Jihadist Terrorism is to Muslims…
what Global Warming Alarmists are to Environmentalism!
The actions of both are deplorable; neither are beneficial to humanity.
…and Dr. Suzuki has failed Environmentalism! (Just to correct the headline in Maclean’s)
Andrew30 says:
December 7, 2013 at 10:34 am
A developer is someone who wants to build a house in the forest.
An environmentalist is someone who owns a house in the forest.
LOL, I’m so stealing that. 🙂
I have read the articles which this post refers to. It seems to me that Suzuki is simply having cheese with his whine, an old age self-reflection pity party, a weak tepid-tea teary-eyed crying jag, and a milk toast I-need-a-hug moment. That it makes it onto front page watermelon news, given its whiny nature, says more about the watermelon news than it does Suzuki. They are all aging past their flowers-in-my-hair prime. And they can’t age fast enough for me.
There are two moments in time when we realize we don’t know everything. When we hit 30, and when we hit 60, or there abouts. Some people go fishing. People like Suzuki are the ones who need front page hand patting and psychotherapy to get past this epiphany.
I think one of the factors driving environmental OCD over the past century is increasing urbanization. Probably most children, at one point or another, go through a phase in which they are frightened of “germs”, and will engage in cleansing rituals, like wiping their hands on their pants, which serve the self-defeating purpose of transferring more of the little beasties to them. In earlier times, contact with the outdoors, and observation of no harm befalling them, led to diminishment of that anxiety.
Now, the children live in antiseptic urban environments, and they never outgrow that phase. They learn to obsessively towel their hands with antiseptic wipes, and keep their living spaces pristine. All of which has the perverse and self-defeating effect of weakening their immune systems by lack of stimulation. They also develop a tunnel vision. By seeing the constructs of mankind all around them 24/7, they develop an egocentric view in which humans are the center of the world, and are therefore responsible for everything which happens in it.
This is not something to be celebrating, really. What these people are saying, when they say their movement has failed, is it’s time for drastic action. This, in his minds, probably justifies an authoritarian takeover, like is happening in the U.S. with a president who despises our constitution and the silly notion of checks and balances and separation of powers.
Environmentalism is mostly just cover for the radical left. It is all about empowering even more big government. If this wasn’t true, green groups would be livid about Obama’s recent seal of approval on wind farms killing bald eagles. They are silent, since the goals of crippling our power supply and enabling crony profits are much more important to them than a few raptors.
“I guess that means that Democrats are opposed by anti-Democrats?”
Anti-Democrat, that’s what I am, should anyone ask.
Suzuki may be diminished and someday discredited, but like many alarmists he will probably fade away and die a rich man, far richer than a dutiful research geneticist would have been. Who will have the last laugh?
I don’t really care about David Suzuki or whatever goofy nonsense he has to say, but that is a terrible job by the photographer. This is one of the worst cover photos I’ve seen since the John McCain photo on the Atlantic Monthly’s cover back in 2008.
But..but…but..there MUST be global warming! If it is COLD in Canada, surely the Emperor Dr. S. would have frozen to death (with all those new clothes)
(do I need sarc? (:<))