Just When You Thought It Couldn’t Possibly Get Any Sleazier, the Return of Climate Porn, WMO Style

Plus Obama’s Name-and-Shame Deal in a Different Light

Guest Post by Bob Tisdale

Climate Porn is the title of a February 21, 2007 article in Cosmos Magazine authored by Tom Lowe. He writes:

By doing what they do best, the media have taken hold of the climate change debate and placed it firmly in the public and political psyche. However, its predominantly gloomy spin does not appear to have had a significant affect on our day-to-day behaviour; for the majority of people it’s business as usual.

The alarming way in which climate change is presented to the public was referred to recently by a leading U.K. think-tank as ‘climate porn’. It has been described as unreliable at best and counter-productive at worst.

There are a number of papers on the counterproductive effects of promoting climate-related agendas with climate porn. And these are not papers written by skeptics. They’re by true-blue believers in the hazards of human-induced global warming. The abstract of Lowe (2006) Is this climate porn? How does climate change communication affect our perceptions and behaviour? reads:

There is growing concern that the social construction of the issue of climate change and its amplification by normative communication channels may be acting to distance or even remove much of the lay public from a point at which they feel they can take action. This paper discusses the extent to which such representations are imbued by the public psyche and, importantly, the extent to which such messages are likely to effect behavioural change. Evidence is presented from a controlled experiment which explores whether a filmic experience may promote a greater individual reaction to the potential dangers from climate change than simply reading a compendium of scientific information detailing the causes and potential effects of human induced climate change. Results suggest that although the public harbours deep concerns about the effect climate change is having or may have, there is a disconnect between this and the actual sacrifices we are willing to make. Popular reporting of climate change in the style of environmental ‘science fiction’ appears not to be a catalyst for change; rather it creates a nagging concern, the solution to which is felt to be beyond the reach of the ordinary person.

Under the heading of Alarmism, Ereaut and Segnit (2006) write in Warm Words – How are we telling the climate story and can we tell it better? (My brackets and boldface):

The difficulty with it [alarmism] is that the scale of the problem as it is shown excludes the possibility of real action or agency by the reader or viewer. It contains an implicit counsel of despair – ‘the problem is just too big for us to take on’. Its sensationalism and connection with the unreality of Hollywood films also distances people from the issue. In this awesome form, alarmism might even become secretly thrilling – effectively a form of ‘climate porn’. It also positions climate change as yet another apocalyptic construction that is perhaps a figment of our cultural imaginations, further undermining its ability to help bring about action.

And what has the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) recently revived? Yup, you guessed it. Climate porn, in the form of alarmist “weather reports from the future”. Remarkable!! See the WMO webpage How will climate change impact our weather in the year 2050? Watch “weather reports from the future”.

Anthony Watts reported on this a few days ago with his post UN/WMO Propaganda Stunt: climate fantasy forecasts of hell on Earth from the future, and Donna Laframboise has authored The WMO’s Macabre Climate Fiction, which is also well worth a read. The subtitle of her post is:

“Rather than persuading us with reason and logic, the World Meteorological Organization is making stuff up”.

To add further insult to everyone’s (almost everyone’s) intelligence, by their own admission, the WMO has created that series of climate porn YouTube “commercials”—or as Anthony Watts termed them “propaganda stunts”—to promote the UN Climate Summit later this month. And the videos are just a couple minutes long, like alarmist flashing.

About 8 years ago it was determined that climate porn like the WMO’s “weather reports from the future” was counterproductive. Yet, the meteorological arm of the United Nations has chosen to produce a series of 22 climate porn videos.

With the United Nations’ past failures at establishing a new climate accord, they’ve ramped up their levels of futility and desperation.

Congratulations to the WMO. You’ve now entered the realm of purveyors of sleazy climate porn.

# # #

Speaking of futility and desperation, look at what the United States is planning to bring to the global-warming negotiations table. According to the New York Times online article Obama Pursuing Climate Accord in Lieu of Treaty (My boldface):

In preparation for this agreement, to be signed at a United Nations summit meeting in 2015 in Paris, the negotiators are meeting with diplomats from other countries to broker a deal to commit some of the world’s largest economies to enact laws to reduce their carbon pollution. But under the Constitution, a president may enter into a legally binding treaty only if it is approved by a two-thirds majority of the Senate.

To sidestep that requirement, President Obama’s climate negotiators are devising what they call a “politically binding” deal that would “name and shame” countries into cutting their emissions.

Naming and shaming? To my mind, that immediately brought images of childish schoolyard bullying.

Here, let me show you.

It’s well known that the greatest growth in greenhouse gas emissions has come from developing nations, not developed nations. My Figure 1 compares the CO2 emissions (1975 to 2013) of “developed nations” (Australia, Canada, all of Europe and Eurasia, Japan, New Zealand and United States) to those of all other nations, which we’ll encompass under “developing nations”. The data are from the BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2014.

CO2 Emissions Developed v Developing

Figure 1

Clearly, developing nations are responsible for vast majority in the growth in CO2 emissions. So, to put the childish name-and-shame schoolyard bullying into a different light, it’s like high-school bullies from affluent families verbally disparaging the kindergarteners of the disadvantaged…the disadvantaged who are endeavoring to work their way out of poverty. Apparently, the Obama administration’s climate negotiators are regressing into affluent bullies. The U.S. climate negotiators have reached roc

k bottom in their attempts to promote an agenda.

Climate Negotiator 1: Hey, look at those people living in huts. They cook over dung fires inside those huts, burning crap and breathing the smoke.

Climate Negotiator 2: Ooh, that can’t be too good for them.

Climate Negotiator 1: It’s not. Something like 4 million people die annually from indoor air pollution. But now they want electricity, and they want it from something cheap like coal, something that supplies them with continuous electricity…not that on-again, off-again high-cost electricity from solar panels. What are we gonna do?

Climate Negotiator 2: I’ve got an idea. Let’s name them and shame them.

They’ve reached new levels of absurdity.

Advertisements

43 thoughts on “Just When You Thought It Couldn’t Possibly Get Any Sleazier, the Return of Climate Porn, WMO Style

  1. Climate negotiators, ‘climate scientists’ it’s all the same: At the end of the day, it is not about the science, it is only about croneyism, the money and the ability to maintain comfortable lifestyles for the alarmist ‘elite’.
    And, of course, the political left needs a cause to justify itself. They chose climate change/global warming/whatever as their cause celebre. Presumably because they can see their way to tackle this non-problem will screw up western economies in the same way as their economic policies.

  2. NASA recently published the list of CO2 producers and humans are well down the list. The oceans produce the most followed by volcanoes, insects. We still produce a total of 3-4% of total CO2 by burning fossil fuels. Since CO2 has no effect on climate, apart from a little cooling, why do we bother with any of this rubbish?
    Thanks Bob.

  3. One of the “team leaders” at work has been trying this at work to do with a part of our duties of updating info on a computer system, so far everyone on the team I have spoken to thinks it is silly and if anything will have the reverse effect of making us see how many can get their names on the list of shame.
    A similar thing happens in the UK with Anti Social Behavior Orders (ASBO’s) with many in tough areas seeing them as a badge of office.
    James Bull

  4. “The difficulty with it [alarmism] is that … Its sensationalism and connection with the unreality…positions climate change as yet another apocalyptic construction that is … a figment of our … imaginations….”
    Gotta love it when they come out and admit the truth!

    • Hey, nifty! It seems that if you leave certain words out, the truth reveals itself! Sort of the inverse of ‘Climate Science’ where if you leave certain data out, well…

  5. I wonder where alarmists get the idea that the public is deeply concerned?
    Must be from their models.

  6. ‘Results suggest that although the public harbours deep concerns about the effect climate change is having or may have, there is a disconnect between this and the actual sacrifices we are willing to make.’
    What the hell does he mean by “we”? Everybody, and I mean everybody, knows that the people and organizations promoting the climate catastratism meme are absolutely, positively not, and I mean not, not the ones who are going to be making the “actual sacrifices” they expect everyone else to make. Correctly worded that sentence should read: … there is a disconnect between this and the actual sacrifices you, the general public, but not us, are willing to make.

  7. I believe that the way to eliminate most auto accidents would be to remove the drivers side seat belt and air bags and then install a large spike in the center of the steering wheel.

    • Isn’t that the idea of the climate WMO movies? Say you are going to die in only a few years (your children or grandchildren, actually) unless you get with our programme?
      BTW, I remember those movies. Scared the crap out of me, dragging dead babies from under rolled cars while the deputies wept …. What it did was make me afraid to DRIVE for years. High anxiety. Did nothing about making me a safer driver, just frightened me.

    • You will see Putin give him both middle fingers. The big players know Obama for what he is and dismiss him out of hand.

  8. Good news, but unfortunately – not likely to have much effect.
    So much of what passes for news and/or policy these days seems to be driven by agenda as opposed to public good.
    The agenda hasn’t gone away. Until this happens, I personally expect no change in the public stance.

  9. I would suggest people read President Obama’s speech in South Africa last year. He boldly stated that Africans achieving American levels of prosperity and life style would be disastrous for the world. I am not surprised his “climate” negotiators are pushing permanent poverty for the poor. We should just rename them “purveyors of poverty” or POP agents.

    • Also the WMO’s climate porn videos were produced to hype the UN’s little Climate Soiree later this month in NYC, which China and India will not send representatives to attend. The other developing nations in attendance are looking forward to transfer payments from the blue line countries to the red line countries as reparations for climate change. Like all “good socialists”, the UN bureaucrats are buying support with other people’s monies.

      • Gratuitous nudity and sex also sells. It’s the entire purpose of the internet. If there was real climate porn, I’d probably watch it.

  10. That is key: that the so-called true believers are not changing their lives in response to it (except maybe Ed Begley Jr.) but they are demanding everyone else impoverish themselves. That is gonna be a hard sell. It is a classic stand-off; to demand the other side act first. BTW hydraulic hybrids are NOT catching on, the pay back time is too long.

    • That is an impossible question to answer. The actual climate has hardly changed. If you look at climate proxies and estimate back the last 1000 or 10 0000 years, the 20th-21st century changes are smaller than average. Climate change hasn’t killed anybody more than usual.
      Climate change ALARMISM, on the other hand, killed unknown numbers by suckering America into growing corn for automobile ethanol instead of food, causing world hunger, the Arab “Spring” food riots, which killed tens of thousands of Arabs, My guess is that hundreds of thousands have starved to death, hundreds of thousands have died in wars, and Africans weakened by hunger could well be part of the Ebola epidemic there.

  11. What is not true, as everyone knows, is always immensely more fascinating and satisfying to the vast majority of men than what is true. Truth has a harshness that alarms them, and an air of finality that collides with their incurable romanticism.
    –H.L. Mencken
    The public, with its mob yearning to be instructed, edified and pulled by the nose, demands certainties; it must be told definitely and a bit raucously that this is true and that is false. But there are no certainties.
    –H.L. Mencken

  12. Anthony: Thanks for increasing the space between lines–it’s more readable..
    (Now how about darkening the text a bit?)
    REPLY: No.

  13. I think the climate porn is desperate and counterproductive. Maybe that’s why I like it!
    Here’s a gem you probably never saw before – because it’s Russian:

    “This is your planet. And this is your planet on global warming drugs.”

  14. For those in the U.S. – this and other related activities by the out-of-control, left wing progressives in the Climate Industry (and their partners in academia and government) should make it very clear that this November’s election is EXTREMELY important…

  15. Standard prayer for this kind of situation.
    Dear Deity, please protect me from the help of all do-gooders, may they ignore me, overlook me and leave me in peace.
    Out of my peering into the weird world of Climatology, I have come to believe a tax upon all do-gooders is essential to the preservation of civilization.
    As soon as an individual starts proclaiming the need for using your wealth to solve a problem only they can see and cure,, banish them from your community.
    We Canadians have had 60 years of ever growing state control, it shows.
    We have systemically corrupt government.
    Climate Porn, Spin, misspeaking minions.
    It is lying.
    Propaganda serves one purpose only, to stampede citizens into acting against their own interests.
    Thanks to the overwhelming level of propaganda in “science communication” on the CAGW theme, trust in govt is at an all time low.
    The methods and arrogance inherent in the WMO’s messaging is the very definition of Kleptocracy.
    A group of bureaucrats from selected governments, set up an agency devoted to spreading a fear of plant food, unelected, unrepresentative of any taxpayer, avidly advocating for a cure worse than the imaginary problem.
    That it was climate porn all along was inherent in the words of their enablers;
    My translation.
    “Who cares if we are lying, it is for your own good stupid.We are saving the world”.
    Unfortunately Canada has to answer for our part in enabling this rubbish to get off the ground.
    CAGW created, promoted and still protected from scrutiny, by our governments.

  16. “…‘climate porn’. It has been described as unreliable at best and counter-productive at worst.”
    Climate Porn – Giving real porn a bad name.

  17. In the UK, unless you’re a fanatical Grauniad* reader, ‘Global Warming’ or ‘Climate Change’ or whatever new euphemism is flavour of the month elicits nothing but derision.
    *Cultural reference.

    • And bird slicers. And deliberate, planned brownouts and blackouts, as posted here by a Brit whose job included deliberately shutting of the electricity to his own neighborhood.

  18. Environmentalism in general has done more harm to Science and the reputation of scientists than any other phenomenon in the past 400 years.

  19. I wish it was porn. That’s why I have high-speed internet. That’s why some pimply-faced loner invented the internet. They couldn’t get a real date, so they invented a way to get porn without having to leave the house and rent a VHS tape.
    More people would be interested if it was real climate porn. But you have to do it right or else people just fast-forward through everything but the sex.

    • Sex on the Greenland ice sheet!!!! I’d watch that. After about 10 minutes, stiffer than an overdose of Viagra. There must be some volunteers willing to shed for the AGW cause.

  20. Two-minute long videos fit well with the attention spans of the target audience. They do know their marketing strategy above all else.

  21. johnmarshall sez: “NASA recently published the list of CO2 producers and humans are well down the list. The oceans produce the most followed by volcanoes, insects….”
    Volcano emissions are underestimated by an order of magnitude or more, pushing humans even farther down.

  22. “Scary car crash scenes used to be used to promote sensible driving. After a while people became inured to them and emotionally ‘switched off’.”
    -tell me about it. I’ve been trying to teach my son to drive but those drivers Education videos they forced on him have him so freaked out I can’t get him to get behind the wheel.

  23. Pornography is a form of sexual arousal. Are these people having orgasms over screwing the rest of humanity? Climate porn would have to be quite graphic and show a lot. I don’t see it that way.

  24. Well, it looks like the ClimEvangelists™ – aka the IPCC and the UN stable of “accredited” NGOs – have given up on the persuasive merits of their short-lived high-production values “tick-tick, boom-boom, doom-doom” movies [see, for example, http://hro001.wordpress.com/2014/03/30/wg-iis-sequel-to-ar5-the-movie-more-tick-tick-boom-boom-doom-doom/%5D and are now offering the audio-visual equivalent of a series of increasingly gloomier and we-are-more-doomed-than-ever “tweets”.
    In the meantime, it seems that – despite their very best efforts – “Action taken on Climate Change” remains consistently at the bottom of the world’s priority heap.
    Last time I checked (circa May 5/14), there had been 2,013,830 votes cast.
    And today, I find that … Of “4,422,204 votes [for] All Countries & Country Groups / All Genders / All Education Levels / Age Group (All Age Groups)” such “Action” has garnered a mere 933,105 votes – leaving “Action taken on Climate Change” in its undisputed rightful place, i.e. at the very bottom of the world’s priority heap. But don’t take my word for this; check it out for yourself at: http://data.myworld2015.org/
    Little wonder, then, that the WMO should be seen to be flailing off madly in all directions!

  25. Knowing that he cannot sign a legally binding treaty without the Senate’s approval, would signing any other form of “binding agreement” make Ob@ma personally liable for any consequences? Could he be “class actioned”?
    Steve T

  26. It’s fairly simple for me.
    For a big change in our lifestyles, I think the science should have a little bit of evidence behind it.
    The AGW hypothesis predicted a tropospheric hot-spot. There is none. At that point the hypothesis fails. I can’t see why people still try to persuade me that there is a problem without addressing that first point of failure…

Comments are closed.