Climate skeptic: 'Big Brother watched me'

Canada wouldn’t prosecute us over our views on climate change, would it?

By Tom Harris, writing in the Toronto Sun


This slogan appeared on posters of the Party leader in the dystopian society of George Orwell’s 1984.

It was a constant reminder of omnipresent government surveillance for “thoughtcrime” — independent thinking.

In Orwell’s book, Winston Smith, a Ministry of Truth “history re-writer,” quietly rebelled against this oppression, secretly starting a diary expressing forbidden thoughts.

But government telescreens were everywhere.

Watched constantly, Smith’s every move was monitored.

In 1984, the consequences of being caught were dire; the stress on individuals enormous.

As head of the International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC), I have been feeling a bit like Smith these days.

That’s because the ICSC has been under investigation by Canada’s Competition Bureau, an independent law enforcement agency that “has a legislated mandate to ensure Canadian consumers and businesses prosper in a competitive and innovative marketplace.”

Here’s what happened.

In December, 2015 while in Paris attending counter conferences to the United Nations’ climate meetings, I learned the environmental organization Ecojustice had registered a complaint with the Competition Bureau on behalf of six prominent Canadians against ICSC, Friends of Science, and the Heartland Institute.

Ecojustice claimed we presented “climate science misrepresentations” which “promote the denier groups’ own business interest” and “promote the business interests of deep-pocketed individuals and corporations that appear to fund the denier groups.”

Our own core principles — which we state online on our homepage — were presented as evidence against us.

Two of our allies assembled a 37-page response to the attack in which they presented peer-reviewed research in support of our positions.

They suggested I counterattack with this impressive rebuttal.

Others cautioned me to keep my powder dry since the complaint made no sense.

We were simply exercising our rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to express our opinions. That is what science is all about, the opinions of experts based on their interpretations of observations.

Further, the complainants had no idea who helps ICSC financially.

With the exception of Order of Canada recipient, the late Dr. Gerry G. Hatch, who openly supported us, the identities of our donors have been confidential since 2008.

Some of our scientists have had death threats for contesting climate alarmism.

We do not want to risk exposing our donors to such abuse.

So, I did nothing, hoping the Competition Bureau would dismiss the complaint as unfounded.

Yet, five months later, it did launch an investigation, referencing a complaint that we make “representations to the public in promotion of a business interest that are false or misleading in a material respect regarding climate change.”

The bureau warned us,

“If the results of an investigation disclose evidence that, in the opinion of the Commissioner, provides the basis for a criminal prosecution, the matter may be referred to the Attorney General of Canada, who determines whether a prosecution should be undertaken.”

Although I asked the bureau where they suspected ICSC may have made false or misleading statements, it refused to say, citing subsection 10(3) of the Competition Act which requires inquiries to be conducted privately.

Aside from a letter in November, 2016 informing me that the investigation was “ongoing”, I heard essentially nothing until the beginning of July, 2017.

I received a letter from the bureau informing me,

“While the Commissioner has discontinued the inquiry, and no further steps are contemplated at this time, be advised that no binding determination has been made respecting the conduct of International Climate Science Coalition. The Commissioner continues to have discretion to investigate and take enforcement action in respect of matters previously inquired into, including where additional information is discovered following the discontinuance of an inquiry.”

The National Observer reported they received an e-mail from a bureau spokesperson concerning this investigation stating, “We invite Canadians who believe they may have additional information to contact the Competition Bureau.”

So, after nearly 14 months, the investigation is “discontinued” but revivable if it receives “additional information.”

Is this the Canada my father and grandfathers defended against tyranny?

Harris is the executive director of the Ottawa-based International Climate Science Coalition

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
September 26, 2017 8:21 am

Orwell would have gone ballistic.

Reply to  johnofenfield
September 26, 2017 9:08 am

Orwell intended 1984 as a warning, not as a script.

Reply to  firetoice2014
September 26, 2017 9:27 am

Bingo, 1984 was supposed to be a cautionary tale, not “Totalitarianism For Dummies.”
I consistently think that Orwell, Huxley, Bradbury, and Rand (and Murphy) were all raging optimists.

son of mulder
Reply to  firetoice2014
September 26, 2017 10:28 am

Beware Orwell, the man who said
“A Socialist United States of Europe seems to me the only worth-while political objective today”.
Maybe it was a script.

Reply to  firetoice2014
September 26, 2017 11:16 am

It was a warning against totalitarianism, not socialism. Orwell was a socialist for his entire life. While he saw the tendency to authoritarian impositions amongst his comrades, he nevertheless sought out a non-authoritarian socialist solution to the world’s problems.
It’s clear if you read the essay the quote is taken from. The “united states of europe” he wanted was a bulwark against Soviet Russia’s hegemony and a means to mitigate the possibility of nuclear war.

Reply to  firetoice2014
September 26, 2017 11:25 am

Somehow I managed to double up that link. Here we go again.

son of mulder
Reply to  firetoice2014
September 26, 2017 1:03 pm

Archer, there you go clearly much of the seeds of the EU were planted by Orwell’s essay. Why else would Jean Monnet an EU founding father say
“Europe’s nations should be guided towards the superstate without their people understanding what is happening. This can be accomplished by successive steps, each disguised as having an economic purpose, but which will eventually and irreversibly lead to federation.”

Reply to  firetoice2014
September 26, 2017 1:17 pm

“Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…” Churchill 1947
These are keen and wise words that no one seems to take to heart these days. Basically what Churchill was getting at is that it’s not the form of government that you write down on paper that makes it good or bad -Communism on paper is ‘utopian’ in nature after all- but the people running it.
Can Democratic, Communist, or Socialist governments be good or bad? Yes to all, as long as you aren’t blindly entrusting people to run it in your best interests or part of the mob that falls into totalitarianism, and that was clearly the theme of 1984. As of today, the Democratic system is the best assurance against the abuse of power from the state.
It would be interesting to see if Orwell would be a socialist now in today’s much different society. He was obviously privy to the traps that the system could easily fall into that have already started to plague our economy and way of thinking.

Reply to  firetoice2014
September 26, 2017 2:52 pm

As Jefferson put it “That government is best which governs least.”

Reply to  firetoice2014
September 26, 2017 4:54 pm

“It was a warning against totalitarianism, not socialism.”
Socialism IS totalitarianism.

Bill Zmek
Reply to  firetoice2014
September 26, 2017 6:31 pm

Socialism is totalitarianism because it confuses needs with rights. For example, to claim that medical care is a right means that the providers of medical care must be subject to the needs of the people through the agency of the state. Providers thus become, in some measure, the slaves of the state. The same will be true for providers of food, or housing, or clothing. Eventually, all human needs will become subject to the arbitration of the state. Such a state is totalitarian, in every sense of the word. Such a state will rob us all of our humanity, first by robbing us of the ability to provide for our own needs, then by robbing us of our hope for own life.

Robert B
Reply to  firetoice2014
September 26, 2017 7:54 pm

“Basically what Churchill was getting at is that it’s not the form of government that you write down on paper that makes it good or bad ”
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.” C W Lewis
One thing missing from interpretations of Orwell is that the totalitarians believe the oppressed should be grateful. They aren’t giggling about what they got away with. Orwell died a miserable bastard because he refused to accept that socialism always leads to totalitarianism.

Reply to  firetoice2014
September 26, 2017 9:32 pm

Socialism IS totalitarianism.

No, it’s not. They’re opposite.

David Ball
Reply to  firetoice2014
September 26, 2017 11:21 pm

MRW September 26, 2017 at 9:32 pm says;
“‘Socialism IS totalitarianism.'”
“No, it’s not. They’re opposite.”

They are supposed to be opposite, but due to human nature, they end up the same.

Reply to  firetoice2014
September 27, 2017 3:25 am

son of mulder September 26, 2017 at 1:03 pm could you please provide the original source?

Reply to  firetoice2014
September 27, 2017 3:28 am

MRW socialism ends up as totalitarianism through the following routecomment image

Reply to  firetoice2014
September 27, 2017 6:41 am

I’ve read that a benevolent dictatorship may be the best form of government.
Unfortunately benevolent dictators are as rare as hen’s teeth.

Reply to  firetoice2014
September 27, 2017 6:43 am

To those on the receiving end of government provided free stuff. Socialism does provide them with the freedom of not having to worry where their next meal is coming from.
The problem is that there are no free lunches. That free stuff has to be provided by someone.
Everything provided by government has to be first taken from those who made it. Usually by force.

Joel Snider
Reply to  firetoice2014
September 27, 2017 12:12 pm

“‘Socialism IS totalitarianism.’”
“No, it’s not. They’re opposite.”
Actually, it always was totalitarianism – proponents just used the ol’ bait and switch to sell it as the opposite. The mechanics make it impossible for it to be anything else.
Just like almost any progressive policy almost invariably does the opposite of what it claims to do.

Santa Baby
Reply to  johnofenfield
September 27, 2017 11:17 pm

They are just showing their true colors, not beeing science? ” In science, refuting an accepted belief is celebrated as an advance in knowledge; in religion it is condemned as heresy”. (Bob Parks, Physics, U of Maryland). No prizes for guessing how global warming skepticism is normally responded to.”

Tom Halla
September 26, 2017 8:23 am

Canada (and the British) have very squishy free speech guarantees.The UK does not have a constitution, and the Canadian version has rather too many exceptions. Of course, the US has its proponents of “hate speech” rules that do much the same thing.
There are people out there who act as if Eric Blair wrote an instruction manual.

September 26, 2017 8:25 am

O Canada!

Reply to  texasjimbrock
September 26, 2017 9:12 am

… and elsewhere, the BBC is airing a radio programme tomorrow on using “The Law” against governments and corporations that don’t comply. This all started a few years ago, there is clearly much money behind it, coupled of course with a quasi-religious cult with an enormous brainwashed army of foot soldiers.

Reply to  texasjimbrock
September 26, 2017 9:30 am

our own government has done worse

Brett Keane
Reply to  texasjimbrock
September 26, 2017 10:43 am

Son of Mulder, that is a deceiving remark. I am sure you know he recanted his marxism before writing 1984 etc..

Ursus Augustus
Reply to  Brett Keane
September 26, 2017 11:07 am

More to the point it was having seen not so much the ‘light’ regarding socialism as the ‘darkness’ that he recanted and wrote 1984 to give form to his realisation.
Perhaps we need a new ‘1984’ to hoist CAGW onto.

Tom Halla
Reply to  Ursus Augustus
September 26, 2017 11:15 am

The late Michael Crichton tried with “State of Fear”, which did not quite jell as storytelling. Good backround, but a bit disjointed.

son of mulder
Reply to  Brett Keane
September 26, 2017 1:12 pm

Brett, I never said Orwell was a Marxist but he was definitely a socialist.

September 26, 2017 8:36 am

some bunch of bureaucrats has be to be fired for abuse of power as an example.
Oh never mind, it’s Trump USA, it’s Tru…deau Canada.

Roger Knights
Reply to  Frederic
September 26, 2017 12:19 pm

The bureaucrats might have feared retribution if they did NOT launch an investigation to get the complainants off their backs. (I interpret the messages sent from them as mere boilerplate.)

September 26, 2017 8:37 am

Also worth mentioned Trudeau the Prime Minister with the fancy socks has stated he admires China and how they get things done. So that should give an indication the Liberal tone of government in Canada.

Reply to  nc
September 26, 2017 11:03 am

Very relevant point on Trudeau, Jeff Immelt, the former CEO of General Electric and an economic adviser to Obama said “China may not be you cup of tea but their government works.”

Roger Knights
Reply to  Tim Zebedee
September 26, 2017 12:20 pm

It gets the trains running on time. (And sometimes into each other.)

Reply to  Tim Zebedee
September 26, 2017 2:53 pm

Depends on how you define “works”.

September 26, 2017 8:37 am


Ziiex Zeburz
September 26, 2017 8:40 am

You are lucky it is Canada, if it was Germany you would be in jail.

G. Karst
September 26, 2017 8:42 am

Canada has been successfully hijacked by the international liberal movement. It will be difficult to recover until a social policy disaster ensues. There seems to be a death wish infecting the otherwise pragmatic population. Is there a cure or must the fever run it’s course? GK

Steve Borodin
Reply to  G. Karst
September 26, 2017 8:52 am

More like the International Fascist League.

Reply to  G. Karst
September 26, 2017 8:58 am

” …international liberal movement.”
Why do we keep calling them liberals? They aren’t liberal and haven’t been for quite some time.

Reply to  SMC
September 26, 2017 10:39 am

Yup. The correct term is ‘Leftist’.

Reply to  SMC
September 26, 2017 11:41 am

Steve Borodin got it right with his comment just a few comments above: They are fascist leftists, not liberals. Classic liberalism is suffering death by suffocation under the modern day fascism that appears to be in the process of becoming pandemic.

Reply to  SMC
September 26, 2017 10:54 pm

“Alt Left” is a better descriptor. They hate it, so be sure to use it. It seems Canada is trying real hard to catch up with Sweden and Germany … give Trudeau a chance and he will.

Steve Keppel-Jones
Reply to  G. Karst
September 26, 2017 11:35 am

Ontario is trying really hard to show what a social policy disaster looks like. Will the rest of the provinces take note?

Reply to  G. Karst
September 26, 2017 12:21 pm

G. Kamrst –
The disaster is unfolding as you speak as Trudeau is planning on implementing draconian tax measures this fall. Many people and companies are moving of shore. Like many others with investments in Canada, I am liquidating most of my portfolio given that some of these tax “reforms” are said to be retroactive. The Bank of Canada is also messinfpg exports up with raising interest. Out two western provinces have gone NDP and anti-development especially oil and natural days and an economy disrupting Carbon Tax. BC has lost close to 50 billion dollars in proposed LNG plants in the last few weeks and blocking other pipeline developments
The flight of capital from these two provinces is huge. And now with the strongly left wing actions of the Federal Government is driving more capital off shore.
Many folks are liquidating their portfolios like I am and waiting till this insanity goes away in four or five years. I hope. Can you spell impen dingbrecession and safe havens?

Reply to  Wayne Delbeke
September 26, 2017 5:30 pm

How about some links?
The tax measures getting the most flack are designed to prevent professionals from splitting income with family members. Doctors and dentists should not pay less tax than their secretaries.
One of my younger siblings left business and took a job. All of a sudden, a whole bunch of tax loopholes closed. What a shock!

Reply to  Wayne Delbeke
September 26, 2017 8:03 pm

CA.Gov, 12-8-2015
Re: Gov.Brown’s activities at COP21
Follow the links which include Toronto, Canada, July 2015
Also photos on this webpage.
CA.Gov, 9-22-2017
Quebec City
‘California, Quebec and Ontario Sign Agreement To Link Carbon Markets’
Also includes links and photos
Ontarians had no direct vote on cap-and-trade.

Reply to  Wayne Delbeke
September 27, 2017 6:45 am

commie, doctors and dentists don’t pay less tax than their secretaries. They may pay at a lower rate, but they don’t pay less.
Regardless, why shouldn’t legitimate business expenses be deductible?

September 26, 2017 8:45 am

Are there any countries not ruled by tyranny at this point? I can’t think of any…..
As far as I can see, the only way out of this is to stop selling fossil fuels immediately. Yes, bad things WILL happen. It’s either that or sit in the pot like a lobster until the boiling water kills us. I guess it’s whether or not you want this fight now in your lifetime or you are leaving it to your children to figure out. It will not resolve itself. There’s too much at a stake and too many people and governments involved.
(It may be impossible to get oil and gas to go along. In spite of claims to the contrary, oil and gas benefit mightily from climate change propaganda. Renewables yeild tax credits, they need backup. Huge quantities of fossil fuels are used in manufacturing and installing said “renewables”. It’s a win-win for the fossil fuel industries.)

Joel O'Bryan
Reply to  Sheri
September 26, 2017 8:56 am

Yes, The USA. We just got rid of tyrant Obama by term limits and prevented his choice, an easily coercible Hillary, from assuming his throne. Obama and Putin both no doubt have fat folders full of blackmail material against the Clinton Crime Syndicate and her cronies. When that didn’t play out as Obama planned, he tried to have his crinies create one against Trump by unmasking intel intercepts. They came up dry, so they have had to fabricate one.

Michael 2
Reply to  Sheri
September 26, 2017 9:20 am

“whether you want this fight now or you are leaving it to your children.”
I fight my fights and my children will fight theirs. I cannot predict or fight my children’s fights.

Steve Zell
Reply to  Sheri
September 26, 2017 10:06 am

Whether the greenies like it or not, oil and gas will be burned in Canada into the foreseeable future. Most of Canada is brutally cold four to five months a year, and people will always need oil and gas to heat their homes. Even if the extra CO2 did cause air temperatures to increase, many Canadians wouldn’t mind -38 F on Christmas morning instead of -40 F.
If greenies in Canada really want zero CO2 emissions, let them spend a winter in a teepee. And no wood fires, because burning wood produces more CO2 than natural gas or oil, and it destroys forests!

September 26, 2017 8:47 am

Are you or have you, or any members of your family, or your friends, now or in the past, or intend at some future time to be members of, or associated with, or read literature by, or view images and videos from, the International Climate Denier Organizations, membership that includes but is not limited to Heartland Institute, wattsupwiththat·com, joannenova·com·au, climateofsophistry·com/, notalotofpeopleknowthat·wordpress·com, principia-scientific·org, notrickszone·com etc., etc,

September 26, 2017 8:48 am

They are going to conduct an inquiry, it’s secret so you have no right to know what the charges are or who your accusers are or even who the commission is talking to you in order to conduct this “inquiry”.
Your only option is to wait until this secret tribunal is finished to find out the predetermined result.

Reply to  MarkW
September 26, 2017 9:08 am

OH NO!!! the Competition Bureau has placed ICSC on DOUBLE SECRET PROBATION!
Truly this is a farce worthy of the National Lampoon, if it didn’t have such dark undertones.

Reply to  rocketscientist
September 26, 2017 7:49 pm

Almost sounds like the Canadian Humans Rights Tribunals…who have also have gone after the likes of Mark Steyn (unsuccessfully) for an article in the Canadian magazine McLeans titled “The Future Belongs to Islam”. You may have also heard that Mr. Steyn is also being sued by certain climate academic activists such as Michael Mann.

September 26, 2017 8:49 am

The inquiry is secret, which means that you have no right to know anything about who they are talking to, or any chance to mount a defense. You just get to wait until they render their decision.
Truly Orwellian.

Reply to  MarkW
September 26, 2017 8:50 am

Sorry about the second post. The first failed to show up when I first posted it.

Reply to  MarkW
September 26, 2017 9:12 am

I will only suggest that you can’t make that point often enough 😛

john harmsworth
Reply to  MarkW
September 26, 2017 12:04 pm

Not so much. It is a private investigation, not a secret one.

Reply to  john harmsworth
September 26, 2017 2:55 pm

Private means they can’t divulge any information regarding it.
So the difference is in the word, not the impact.

Reply to  john harmsworth
September 26, 2017 5:52 pm

“Not so much. It is a private investigation, not a secret one.”
Oh thank God. We can all relax now.

September 26, 2017 8:51 am

Time for a complaint against Ecojustice, a presumably tax free eco-charity which is abusing the regulatory agencies of Canada to suppress free speech and to harm a private Canadian entity in order to further its own ambitions and those of its funders.

Reply to  andrewpattullo
September 26, 2017 9:04 am

I agree. Their donors might include wind farms owners, solar cell manufacturers, law firms representing both..
Free speech is presumably for individuals,or voluntary groups, eg, running a blog.

Reply to  andrewpattullo
September 26, 2017 7:28 pm

Yes lets investigate all the conflicts of interest in their funding.

Reply to  TRM
September 26, 2017 8:15 pm

Last time I checked, EcoJustice (Vancouver) and Earthjustice (San Francisco) had interlocking Boards/Trustees.
Which means they share Board/Trustee members.

Reply to  TRM
September 27, 2017 10:59 am

Earthjustice, U.S.
Re: Connections between Earthjustice and EcoJustice
Trip Van Noppen, Pres. of Earthjustice, U.S.
Follow the links:
Ecojustice, Canada
Use the link: ‘People of Ecojustice’ at the bottom of this webpage.

Reply to  TRM
September 27, 2017 2:02 pm

Canada Revenue Agency / Registered Charities
Ecojustice Canada Society, Vancouver, B.C.
Registered: 1991-01-01
Registration No.: 134748474 RR 0001
Directors/Trustees and Like Officials
Will Roush
Trip Van Noppen, Official Term, 2008-04-30 to 2018-10-30

Reply to  TRM
September 27, 2017 3:39 pm

Earthjustice, San Francisco, Calif.
501(c)(3) tax exempt organization.
IRS Form 990s available from 2001-2015
Donnell Van Noppen, Pres., a.k.a. as Trip Van Noppen
Will Roush, Board member.
Tax return forms for download at:
Public information.

Reply to  TRM
September 27, 2017 6:20 pm

CA. Gov, 6-20-2017
California appointments:
Amelia Garcia: Has been associate attorney at Earthjustice since 2015.
Compensation: $100,788

September 26, 2017 8:59 am

They can take enforcement action without letting you even know the charge, let alone defend yourself? Surely there is some constitutional defence?
On the bright side, the Alarmists failed!

john harmsworth
Reply to  Phoenix44
September 26, 2017 12:06 pm

That’s not what the article or the law says.

September 26, 2017 8:59 am

Poor Canada, our very favored neighbor. (We’ll forget that part about the irate Canadians burning down the White House, or that other part about Canada now requiring all US visitors to declare whether they have knives that can be opened with one hand. ) We luv u guys. Moose, Mounties, dozens of autonomous indigenous nations and all that.
But the “complainant always has the upper hand” business? THAT is Orwellian. Means I, or you, or the complete âhss next door can register a complaint first then have the long-arm of the Law harass you endlessly. (Contrarily of course, you COULD be the first to complain about Ye Ol’ âhss the neighbor, and get the arm-of-Law to do your bidding. But think of what either implies…)
I tend to think that honorable people really ought to get cleared of “suspicion of malicious intent” very rapidly. Its like that nameless US Supreme Court justice said, “It seems we can’t actually define porn, but I know it when I see it.”. Same for Big Brother’s chicanery. Get the complaint aired. Make rebuttals in court. Has a justice think about whether the complaint is vacuous or not. If it is, then toss it out. END OF PROBLEM.

Reply to  GoatGuy
September 26, 2017 8:21 pm

As I recall, British Regulars set fire to Washington, D.C. and not Canadians.

Juan Slayton
Reply to  GoatGuy
September 27, 2017 8:13 pm

It seems we can’t actually define porn, but I know it when I see it.”
Paraphrase of concurringing opinion of Justice Potter Stewart in Jacabellis v Ohio

Bruce Cobb
September 26, 2017 9:03 am

They keep using that word “justice”. I don’t believe they know what it means.

Tom Halla
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
September 26, 2017 10:23 am

Remember, “War is peace”, “Freedom is slavery”. . .

Andre Lauzon
September 26, 2017 9:14 am

Tooooooooooooo much power in the hands of un-elected political hacks. Lazy politicians???/

September 26, 2017 9:15 am

Thanks for posting this! Here is one of my radio interviews on the topic:
Tom Harris

September 26, 2017 9:32 am

“representations to the public in promotion of a business interest that are false or misleading in a material respect regarding climate change.”
ask them to define “climate change”.
depending upon which authority you cite, the term may or may not include natural variability. which means the term is ambiguous, and as such pretty much any statement about climate change is both true and false at the same time.

September 26, 2017 9:38 am

climate change is both true and false at the same time
climate change (authority A) = climate change (authority B)
climate change (authority A) = natural variability + human change
climate change (authority B) = human change
natural variability + human change = human change
human change human change CO2 for natural variability 0.
thus if natural variability 0, then human change human change

September 26, 2017 9:39 am

climate change (authority A) = climate change (authority B)
climate change (authority A) = natural variability + human change
climate change (authority B) = human change
natural variability + human change = human change
human change != human change CO2 for natural variability != 0.
thus if natural variability != 0, then human change != human change
since: human change = human change and human change != human change
climate change must be both true and false at the same time.

Steve from Rockwood
Reply to  ferdberple
September 26, 2017 10:08 am

Your equation 4 is false.
natural variability + human change = total change
total change != human change
Unless natural variability << human change and total change ~ human change

Reply to  Steve from Rockwood
September 26, 2017 10:57 pm

Fancy bringing maths to a postmodernistic argument. Silly men.

Mrs Peel
September 26, 2017 10:10 am

This nonsense cuts both ways.
File a class action counter complaint with the Competition Bureau, one widely endorsed by associates of ICSC, of Friends of Science, etc.The complaint should target Ecojustice and big money connections that have vested interests in silencing public dialogue and competition that are adverse to their interests – to James Hogan of desmogblog and the Suzuki foundation, to the Climate Accountability Institute, and so forth.

patrick bols
September 26, 2017 10:22 am

Kafka’s “The Trial” is a good reference.

Fred Brohn
Reply to  patrick bols
September 26, 2017 10:48 am

It is certainly “Kafkaesque”!

September 26, 2017 10:40 am
… modern society would collapse into anarchy within days without Fossil Fuels. Thus, it appears that Ecojustice is presenting false and misleading information that puts society at risk. Maybe someone should complain. Perhaps to the Canada Revenue Agency which has granted Ecojustice the status of being a federally registered charity on the basis of providing a ‘net public benefit.’ [3] For this status, charities are required to provide fair and balanced information. We don’t think they are doing that – especially in regard to the NEB- National Energy Board. [4] It is hard to see what the alleged ‘benefit’ of Ecojustice’ actions are when Canada’s economic strength is being damaged, investors are being scared off and hundreds of thousands of workers are jobless, thanks to pipeline “Blockadia” – driven by Ecojustice and groups like them.
Yes, it is Freakojustice that is misleading the public.

Reply to  Robert Kernodle
September 26, 2017 11:07 am

comment image

john harmsworth
Reply to  Robert Kernodle
September 26, 2017 12:11 pm

I applaud the sentiment of suing the asses off all these “Green” justice jackasses in any instance where it is possible. A string of expensive judgements against them might cripple some or at least keep their heads down and stain them somewhat in the public eye. They style themselves as holier than thou ( where thou is anyone who questions them). In general, their targets are too timid to challenge them and only hope that they can dodge serious damage, no matter how unfair. Three cheers to Resolute Forest Products and others like them who tackle this baloney head-on.

Reply to  Robert Kernodle
September 26, 2017 8:53 pm

Catherine Donnelly Foundation | Ecojustice, Vancouver
Nov.2, 2015
Founding donation: $1 million from the Catherine Donnelly Foundation which is a RC foundation based in Toronto.
Webpage also includes: People of Ecojustice

September 26, 2017 10:57 am

I read it as , they got nothing but don’t want to admit they should never have started down this road in the first place . Saving face exercise by unthinking and unfeeling bureaucratic body full of people who are so unless that otherwise could not get a job teaching rubber ducks to float .

Clyde Spencer
September 26, 2017 11:05 am

Tom Harris,
Are you by chance the same Tom Harris who used to write science articles for the San Jose Mercury News?

Gerald Machnee
September 26, 2017 11:08 am

But if you are of the AGW religion you can publish lies any time.
How many time has the Arctic been forecast to be ice free before this year. David barber said it would be ice free in 2008.
At a conference in Winnipeg in December 2016 a researcher at the U of Manitoba said Hudson bay would be ice free in the WINTER in 5 to 10 years. This was in the Winnipeg Free Press. When will he be investigated?

Reply to  Gerald Machnee
September 26, 2017 8:29 pm

And in May 2017, Dr. Barber aboard the Canadian Coast Guard Icebreaker CCGS Amundsen had to cancel a scientific climate change research study trip off Hudson Bay due to unprecedented sea ice conditions.
Dr. David Barber of University of Manitoba also proclaimed in 2008 that the Arctic that had never been ice free in over a million years would be gone by 2015.
“The December 5th StarPhoenix article mentioned above says that according to Barber, “The ice that has covered the Arctic basin for a million years will be gone in little more than six years because of global warming.” I wonder if Barber can seriously believe that the Arctic Basin has been continuously ice covered for “a million years.” There is considerable evidence that the entire Arctic region was warmer just several thousand years ago than it is now.”
And even covered here…

September 26, 2017 11:11 am

The action against the ICSC would appear to be in contradiction of the Canadian charter of Rights , incorporated into a constitutional document , largely as the result of an initiative by a Pierre Trudeau:
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (French: La Charte canadienne des droits et libertés), in Canada often simply the Charter, is a bill of rights entrenched in the Constitution of Canada. It forms the first part of the Constitution Act, 1982. The Charter guarantees certain political rights to Canadian citizens and civil rights of everyone in Canada from the policies and actions of all areas and levels of the government. It is designed to unify Canadians around a set of principles that embody those rights. The Charter was signed into law by Queen Elizabeth II of Canada on April 17, 1982, along with the rest of the Act.”
Has the young Trudeau repealed that Act . I am not sure that he can do that without Crown agreement.
There is along list of Rights and Freedoms in the original Charter and the right to a free trial and the presumption of innocence is among them .
If a similar situation had arisen in, say, Pinochet’s Chile ( and it probably did ) just imagine the protests from the Liberal Left .

Nigel S
September 26, 2017 11:18 am

Quite reminiscent of Mark Steyn’s ordeal at the hands of Canadian Human Rights Commission.

September 26, 2017 11:39 am

Piddle on them. The first time this sort of issue comes properly and fully before a Court in Oz, Canada or UK, the CACA crowd’s phoney science will be destroyed in cross-examination by very capable QCs. The US Courts could probably do it too – Mann v Ball/Steyn has worked out well so far for Mann hasn’t it…?

The Reverend Badger.
September 26, 2017 11:57 am

I look forward to seeing some interesting court cases soon where can see a nice discussion as to whether it is scientifically correct to add radiative fluxes from 2 sources and derive a sink temperature from the SB equation AND a nice court room discussion as to which experiments in the entire history of mankind show that you can transfer energy from a cool object to a hotter one via radiation and thus make the hotter one warmer.
These are pretty fundamental to the arguments for and against the science of AGW and it is simple basic science things like this that we need to get aired in a courtroom. It’s going to be priceless!!
Of course the lists of fundamental errors, misconceptions, faulty logic, etc are very long so I think these cases could take years before there is a verdict. Counter claims should always be made as well as there is a very good chance masses of money can be extracted from the AGW pseudoscientists and their supporters once we win.

September 26, 2017 12:11 pm

“Further, the complainants had no idea who helps ICSC financially”
Well, who does?
It would present yourselves in a more favourable light if you were open and honest about that.
One of the charges laid against skeptics – and a barrier to acceptance of their viewpoint – is that fossil fuel business interests fund them.
show that’s not the case (or defend that funding).
(I’d very much like to know who funds the GWPF… their mysterious funding is a major source of my distrust of the information they put out)

Reply to  Griff
September 26, 2017 2:55 pm

You must be very stupid not to be able to discover that in short order.
Who funds your childish postings by the way?

Reply to  Griff
September 26, 2017 2:59 pm

The reasons why the donor list is kept private were given in the article and are eminently justifiable.
Even if the list was 100% open, the trolls will still strain some gnats in order to find an obscure connection to an oil company somewhere in the list and from that declare this proves they are funded by oil companies.
Look what they did to Dr. Soon.
The group that funded him got a one time grant that amounted to about 1% of the organizations budget for that year.
The donation was years before Dr. Soon was hired.
The donation was a grant for a project that had nothing to do with climate and wasn’t even for the group Dr. Soon worked for.
Nonetheless the usual bad actors declared that Dr. Soon had to be ignored because he was funded by big oil.

Reply to  Griff
September 26, 2017 3:00 pm

No Griff, the reason you distrust their information because it doesn’t support your religious beliefs.
You apply the same standard no matter who’s putting out the information.

Reply to  Griff
September 26, 2017 3:21 pm

Griff, you prove convincingly that you are a warmist bigot,because you go the easy low IQ way of promoting funding smears. YOU that same raging hypocrite who ignores GOVERNMENT funding of warmist scientists,along with giant super computers and other pricey tools,who have been caught red handed on data manipulations and peer review collusion.
From the post:
“Although I asked the bureau where they suspected ICSC may have made false or misleading statements, it refused to say, citing subsection 10(3) of the Competition Act which requires inquiries to be conducted privately.”
Tom Harris,never found out,since they dropped the 14 month long investigation. They never answered a simple reasonable request,that couldn’t have damaged the obvious witch hunt investigation. 14 months!!!
The complaint was filed,
“Ecojustice claimed we presented “climate science misrepresentations” which “promote the denier groups’ own business interest” and “promote the business interests of deep-pocketed individuals and corporations that appear to fund the denier groups.”
After FOURTEEN months,the complaint/investigation was dropped. They had plenty of time to find out,but there was NOTHING in the end.
THINK Griff,think!
Can’t you see that it was a “witch hunt’?

Reply to  Sunsettommy
September 28, 2017 12:53 pm

“witch hunt” combined with intimidation.
Some VIPs brought forth this complaint!

Reply to  Sunsettommy
September 28, 2017 1:35 pm

Griff has gone quiet,imagine that!

Reply to  Griff
September 26, 2017 5:01 pm

Have you apologises for maliciously slandering Dr. Crockford yet, Skanky?
Don’t you think you should?
As to funds this, that or the other organisation that you are paid to impugn, would it make any difference to inform you – including chapter and verse – of precisely who is was?
It has never stopped you lying about Dr. Soon, and you have been told on numerous occasions the truth of the matter, but you still continue to slander him.
But then, that’s what you paid to do isn’t it, lie?
As a matter of interest, I wonder what your employers would make of your wide spread notoriety…

Monna M
Reply to  Griff
September 26, 2017 9:30 pm

Griff, the people I know (including me) are VERY touchy about the privacy of their charitable donations. It’s between me, God, and Canada Revenue Agency (the equivalent of the US’s IRS), and no one else. Any organization the disclosed my donations to it would quickly have one less donor.

Jaakko Kateenkorva
Reply to  Griff
September 27, 2017 4:41 am

One of the charges laid against skeptics – and a barrier to acceptance of their viewpoint – is that fossil fuel business interests fund them. show that’s not the case (or defend that funding).

Heavy accusation there Griff, but in the free civilised democracies the burden on proof is on you.
To get you going French President Emmanuel Macron has deemed max USD $1.7 million lump sum enough to buy a US climate scientist. No reason to think he pulled it out of his hat without checking.

their mysterious funding is a major source of my distrust of the information they put out

A former KBG agent shares your sentiments. Are fractions of degrees in the average outside air temperature is really worth slipping down this slope in your opinion? If yes, please note it goes both ways and CACA will eventually hit the fan.

Tom Gelsthorpe
September 26, 2017 1:14 pm

I knew climate panic had degenerated into derangement 10 years ago when the mayor of Minneapolis worried aloud on the Weather Channel that spring would come too soon. Minneapolis and most of Canada were a mile deep in ice until 18,000 years ago when the current round of warming began.
As it is, people have been moving from both places to Southern California for 150 years because it’s warmer there. How sick and ludicrous can climate hypochondria get?

Caligula Jones
September 26, 2017 1:25 pm

Ah, mission creep. What would pseudo-government organizations do without it? Have to keep those expense accounts full and all that pensionable time adding up.
BTW, this is what happens when another “arm’s length” group decides that actually just doing its job isn’t quite enough work for them:

M Courtney
September 26, 2017 3:01 pm

The investigation must have cost money.
Can you FOI how much and from which budget it came from?
What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

September 26, 2017 3:34 pm

Had “Hellary” been “elected” instead of President Trump you and I would have counted the days until the U.S. Supreme Court would with first restricting free speech until it was completely eliminated !
That guy (Thing?) should have His (It?) forehead shaved just in case there is a few “numbers” stamped there as a way to”Identify” just exactly what “It” (He?) is !!!
And “We” the American People “almost” did the same by electing “Hellary” !!!
Point being the “LEFT” is just using Climate/Global/Change/Warming to “stamp” out FREE SPEECH period, and if that doesn’t work they will “find” something else, AND [ EVERY ] TIME YOU/ME/WE/US GO TO THE VOTING POLLS YOU/ME/WE/US EITHER VOTE TO STOP THAT “CRAP”, ORRRRRRRR, WE VOTE IT INTO [ “LAW” ] and then We live with the results (Which = Consequences)… ? ! ? !!!
And then later the same people come to blogs like this and complain about it… ?
These truly are the last days where/when evil is good and good is evil !

Smart Rock
Reply to  ricks2014
October 1, 2017 10:01 am

ricks2014 – why don’t you tell us what you really feel?

September 26, 2017 4:05 pm

Why can’t this same tactic be used against Ecojustice? Or for that matter, Greenpeace and many others. They have indeed proclaimed false advertisements in order to get donations. Polar bears anyone? All of that was false advertising.
If all it takes is a complaint by citizens…

Reply to  Kozlowski
September 27, 2017 6:51 am

You can file the charges, but the government bureaucrats who run the thing would never actually investigate fellow travelers.

September 26, 2017 6:19 pm

The Liberals in Canada (Trudeau ) attack small business yet encourage Chinese to bring their laundered money and 15% tax payers in to take over Vancouver real-estate and drive the families that pay 40% tax out . Trudeau is a commie lover just like his silver spoon old man .
Go out to UBC and you couldn’t tell the difference whether you were in Beijing . White kids need not apply .

Reply to  Amber
September 26, 2017 8:46 pm

Very well put Amber and I concur and agree, except it will soon be more like 50% tax for us. Canada is for sale, just ask Prime Minister JT…they sell visa’s to the Chinese mainland nationals who now see Canada as the second favourite place in the world destination to launder their cash, after USA, driving up the price of real estate in Vancouver and Toronto where Canadians cannot now afford to buy.

Reply to  Earthling2
September 27, 2017 9:07 am

Ah if only Canada was the Number 2 for welcoming the poor who would marvel in front of a dishwasher! That would certainly not threaten Canadians…

D P Laurable
September 26, 2017 6:57 pm

Never underestimate two things about Canadian leftists: their desire to use government power to force you to change and their complete inability to follow through on any project due to incompetence, stupidity and laziness.

October 9, 2017 2:25 am

From birth lefty and amusing, civilised writer Christopher Hitchens’ autobiography shows how ‘revolutions’ on behalf of the people merely replace one set of tyrants with another.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights