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

“BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU.”

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

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
johnofenfield

Orwell would have gone ballistic.

firetoice2014

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

Severian

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.

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.

Archer

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.

Archer

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

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.”

RWturner

“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.

MarkW

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

catweazle666

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

Bill Zmek

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.

“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.

MRW

Socialism IS totalitarianism.

No, it’s not. They’re opposite.

David Ball

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.

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

MRW socialism ends up as totalitarianism through the following routecomment image

MarkW

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

MarkW

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

“‘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

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

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.

texasjimbrock

O Canada!

… 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.

Latitude

our own government has done worse

Brett Keane

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

Ursus Augustus

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

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

Brett, I never said Orwell was a Marxist but he was definitely a socialist.
http://spectre-online.org/george-orwell-marxist/

Frederic

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

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.)

nc

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.

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

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

MarkW

Depends on how you define “works”.

Frederic

NOT Trump USA

Ziiex Zeburz

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

G. Karst

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

More like the International Fascist League.

SMC

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

Vicus

Yup. The correct term is ‘Leftist’.

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.

Bulldust

“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

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

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?

commieBob

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!

Barbara

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.
http://www.gov.ca.gov/news.php?id=19235
And:
CA.Gov, 9-22-2017
Quebec City
‘California, Quebec and Ontario Sign Agreement To Link Carbon Markets’
Also includes links and photos
http://www.gov.ca.gov/news.php?id=19963
Ontarians had no direct vote on cap-and-trade.

MarkW

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?

Sheri

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.)

joelobryan

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

“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

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!

tom0mason

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,

MarkW

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.

rocketscientist

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.

Earthling2

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. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_complaints_against_Maclean%27s_magazine

MarkW

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.

MarkW

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

ClimateOtter

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

john harmsworth

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

MarkW

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

Mark

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

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.

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.

TRM

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

Barbara

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

Barbara

Earthjustice, U.S.
Re: Connections between Earthjustice and EcoJustice
Trip Van Noppen, Pres. of Earthjustice, U.S.
Follow the links:
https://earthjustice.org/about-staff
Ecojustice, Canada
http://www.ecojustice.ca/people/catherine-donnelly-foundation
Use the link: ‘People of Ecojustice’ at the bottom of this webpage.

Barbara

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
Includes:
Will Roush
Trip Van Noppen, Official Term, 2008-04-30 to 2018-10-30
http://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/charities-giving/charities-listings.html

Barbara

ProPublica
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:
https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/941730465
Public information.

Barbara

CA. Gov, 6-20-2017
California appointments:
Amelia Garcia: Has been associate attorney at Earthjustice since 2015.
Compensation: $100,788
http://www.gov.ca.gov/news.php?id=19856

Phoenix44

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

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

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.
GoatGuy

Barbara

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

Juan Slayton

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

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

Tom Halla

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

Andre Lauzon

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

tomharrisicsc

Thanks for posting this! Here is one of my radio interviews on the topic:
http://www.iheartradio.ca/580-cfra/listen-now-can-you-be-prosecuted-over-climate-change-views-1.3316112?mode=Article
Tom Harris

“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.

climate change is both true and false at the same time
===========
proof:
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

proof:
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

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

Bulldust

Fancy bringing maths to a postmodernistic argument. Silly men.

Mrs Peel

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.

Sure. My guess is that just like the original complaint it will be dismissed.

patrick bols

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

Fred Brohn

It is certainly “Kafkaesque”!

http://blog.friendsofscience.org/2017/09/08/responding-to-the-national-observer-article-on-the-competition-bureauecojustice-call-for-inquiry/
… 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.

comment image

john harmsworth

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.

Barbara

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
http://www.ecojustice.ca/people/catherine-donnelly-foundation

knr

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

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

Gerald Machnee

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?

Earthling2

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.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/06/13/delingpole-ship-of-fools-iii-global-warming-study-cancelled-because-of-unprecedented-ice/
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.” https://climatesanity.wordpress.com/2008/12/10/arctic-sea-ice-gone-by-2015-a-challenge-to-david-barber/
And even covered here…
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/14/a-look-at-sea-ice-compared-to-this-date-in-2007/

mikewaite

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

Quite reminiscent of Mark Steyn’s ordeal at the hands of Canadian Human Rights Commission.
http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/i-hate-to-say-i-told-you-so-actually-i-dont-i-love-it/

KO

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.

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.

Griff

“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)

roger

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

MarkW

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.

MarkW

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.

Sunsettommy

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.”
bwahahahahahahahahahaha!!!
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’?

Barbara

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

Sunsettommy

Griff has gone quiet,imagine that!

catweazle666

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

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

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. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/06/10/french-president-offers-us-climate-scientists-e1-5-million-each-to-move-to-france/

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

A former KBG agent shares your sentiments. https://www.hrw.org/russia-government-against-rights-groups-battle-chronicle. 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

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

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:
http://www.restorecsa.com/news/article/manipulating-home-inspections

Tyrants gonna tyr!

M Courtney

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.

[ SOON (If not “very” soon) “ALL” FREE SPEECH IN NORTH AMERICA “WILL” BE ELIMINATED !
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 !
“Canada” YOUR CURRENT PRIME MINISTER IS “ROTTEN” TO HIS CORE !
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 YOU CANADIAN PEOPLE “ELECTED” THAT THING !
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)… ? ! ? !!!
WHY DO SUPPOSEDLY “SANE” HUMAN “PEOPLE” ALWAYS GO TO THE POLLS EVERY 2 TO 4 YEARS AND VOTE TO THEIR/OUR OWN DESTRUCTION ?????????????
THAT IS THE DEFINITION OF “INSANITY” !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
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 !
Pathetic

Smart Rock

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

Kozlowski

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…

MarkW

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

Amber

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 .

Earthling2

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.
https://globalnews.ca/news/3609338/canada-now-no-2-emigration-destination-for-chinas-rich-report/

TomRude

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

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.

Coeur de Lion

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.