The Guardian’s editor has just issued this new guidance to all staff on language to use when writing about climate change and the environment…and it is full-on alarmism. No holding back punches now, because it’s a crisis, so let’s start writing like one! Josh helps us understand the real message.
HT/Willie Soon via Leo Hickman
Josh has interpreted this new policy:
James Delingpole notes:
There is, in essence, no such thing is a ‘climate science denier’ because not even the most ardent sceptic denies the existence of ‘climate science’.
Even more problematic is that use of the word ‘denier’, which implicitly invokes the Holocaust – and in doing so, weirdly and irresponsibly puts ‘being sceptical about anthropogenic global warming’ in the same category as ‘denying that Hitler murdered six million Jews.’
In recent years, climate alarmists have tried to backtrack on the origins of the ‘denier’ slur by pretending that they never intended to invoke Holocaust denial.
But here is Guardian environment journalist George Monbiot writing in 2006:
Almost everywhere, climate change denial now looks as stupid and as unacceptable as Holocaust denial.
Maybe Ms Viner should pay more attention to Thomas Sowell on this subject:
The next time someone talks about “climate change deniers,” ask them to name one — and tell you just where specifically you can find their words, declaring that climates do not change. You can bet the rent money that they cannot tell you.
Why all this talk about these mythical creatures called “climate change deniers”? Because there are some meteorologists and other scientists who refuse to join the stampede toward drastic economic changes to prevent what others say will be catastrophic levels of “global warming.”
There are scientists on both sides of that issue. Presumably the issue could be debated on the basis of evidence and analysis. But this has become a political crusade, and political issues tend to be settled by political means, of which demonizing the opposition with catchwords is one.
Sowell’s point is well made – and goes to the heart of what is wrong with the Guardian‘s new lexicon for its climate change reportage.
The Guardian is tacitly admitting that this is not an argument it is capable of winning on the science or indeed the facts. Therefore, it has decided to ramp up the rhetoric instead.
Do people actually believe what they read in the Guardian? I don’t know any.
Perhaps these periodicals should be used as education tools to demonstrate how to spot falsehoods in the media.
Guardian… prostitutes of journalism.
This is coming due to panic on the part of the Green Blob. And it nas nothing to do with stopping changing climate. Newspaper editors are being given instructions from owners who are part of the green investment swindles.
Make absolutley no mistake about what is happening to them, or about to happen to their investments.
Many Trillions of dollars of investments made by the Green Blob are at risk now that the climate scam is falling apart and collapsing.
Mostly they’ve gone in deep, and long investments and leveraged derivatives on renewable energ industries and wind farms. But with the public rejecting energy mandates, and the continued boom in natural gas supplies keeping prices down it is making it impossible for them to compete much less expand to the levels their investments need to succeed.
So yes it is time to Panic … if you’re multi-billion dollar fund manager deeply invested in the Green Blob.
And the marching orders are going out to their media lapdogs.
Good analysis. In long term obligations states are already withdrawing. See for example today’s WUWT “Indonesia Threatens to Withdraw From Paris Agreement Over Palm Oil”. EU knows that there will be no support for biofuels in the near future. But nobody dares to say: they are to deep into the mess in which all big parties (UN, EU, US) played too big a role themselves. So far it is behind the screens that things are happening.
Another example of their being aware of being on the wrong road: GERMANY, ITALY, HUNGARY & POLAND REJECT NET-ZERO CLIMATE TARGET
https://www.thegwpf.com/cold-feet-germany-poland-snub-eu-appeal-for-greater-climate-ambition/?utm_source=CCNet+Newsletter&utm_campaign=ebef527d59-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2019_05_08_02_41&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_fe4b2f45ef-ebef527d59-36449997
My guess: top politicians are desperately in search for simple theory’s on climate that give a proof for the fact that “It Ain’t Necessarily So” with climate as has been said. In search for ‘New Insights’ that give them a reason to ‘change roads’.
Behind the screens blogs as WUWT must be intensely followed by people who are doing the political long-term planning work.
Basically the climate scam is failing now, not because the shaky climate science is being rejected. It is failing because the economic arguments and the economic demands made by the various implementations of the COP agreements (Paris Agreement) are being rejected by increasingly more voters and politicians around the world.
Besides the US, there is now Poland, Indonesia, Brazil, Australia that are effectively rejecting “climate action” demands from alarmists each for differing reasons.
Even Canada’s new Alberta provincial government of Jason Kenney and United Conservatives, after rejecting Rachel Notley’s Leftwingers positions, is fighting Ottawa and Justin Trudeau. Kenny will likely prevail on these fights over environmental regulations and carbon taxes.
Compare where the Climate Scam was 3 years ago to today.
In 2016:
– Paris Agreement was widely being accepted by governments around the world.
– Alberta had a Progressive government implementing emissions reduction targets from oil sands operations.
– Hillary was assumed to be on her way for continuing Obama’s climate agenda, where she would also nominate Liberals to the US Supreme Court to cement executive actions on implementing the Paris INDCs and sending US dollars to the Climate aid fund.
Now everything is in disarray for the Left. And everything is on a trajectory to continue to get worse for the Climate Scam.
All the Left has available now in more alarmist rhetoric as it is steadily losing ground to economic realities and voter sentiments.
No worries. Our Green Party leader said that we must be a good example to the world. So it seems like we are going to take care of all climate things.
And there´s some 5,5 million of us. It´s going to take a while, but we do it.
So, problem solved.
“So yes it is time to Panic … if you’re multi-billion dollar fund manager deeply invested in the Green Blob.”
Electric-car maker Tesla (TSLA) made a two-year low yesterday and closed at $211, down 154 points from its high in mid-December six months ago. It’s in the midst of a perfect storm of negative news.
zerohedge ran an item saying hes down to 3.9mil which was the fundraising capital left..
not looking so good and the cars keep going up in flames or crashing or both.
and then there was the spacecapsule kaboom
This is hardly surprising given that the BBC – sometimes referred to as the broadcast wing of the Guardian – has recently declared climate science to be ‘settled’ and so considers it unnecessary to invite any opposing views on to discussions about AGW.
Surely ‘Groupthink’ deserves a place on the list of approved descriptions of the alleged phenomenon.
“Climate breakdown” occurs in three forms:
(a) What occurs when the satellite link is on the blink and climate-change can not be detected in real-time any longer.
(b) When the supercomputer is on the fritz due to being inappropriately used to keep the coffee pot warm.
(c) What happens when a country withdraws from the ‘Paris Agreement’ global climate-derangement scam.
From AOC to Michael Gove to the Grauniad, our enemies are going mad. “Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad.” (Henry Wadsworth Longfellow).
Yes sir, a couple years ago here in California the crazies were running their propaganda presses full speed. “We’re entering a permanent drought”, “this is an emergency!” Well, today we’re expecting more rain. It’s been a wet winter and our spring is off to a very mild and wet start.
You’re entering a permanent floodrought. 🙂
I bristle at the “Denier” slur.
Has any forecast of the “Alarmists” ever been correct?
My question is serious.
Most readers here know many of the false prophecies made by the Alarmists;
I’d like to see a list of their correct forecasts (if any).
Yes Greta…whatever you say Greta.
Rest assured, what the Guardian has put into printed instruction is what the BBC has told them to do.
From here on, the BBC will also be using provocative phrases to ramp up their already fever pitch cant, on human induced climate change.
Just don’t subscribe to their nonsense and don’t visit any Guardian page which gives them revenue from click count.
“Increasingly, climate scientists…”
Really? Name them! Who are they? What are their qualifications? What is their background? Who pays them? What are they paid to do? What evidence do they use to support their increasingly alarmist claims?
Every time a crisis sceptic speaks, these questions are asked immediately and answered by the questioner in the most defamatory way possible. (Except for the last question. They don’t want to ask the last question of a crisis skeptic because they don’t want to hear any evidence contrary to their belief system.)
The Guardian, and the MSM in general, never asks these questions of the climate scientists who support the crisis paradigm. Those scientists are never questioned about their evidence, much less their motives.
It’s disgusting, but never discussed.
“The Guardian, and the MSM in general, never asks these questions of the climate scientists who support the crisis paradigm. Those scientists are never questioned about their evidence, much less their motives.”
Exactly. Talk radio here in Seattle is generally Liberal, and never questions anything democratic. There are a couple of Libertarian/conservative voices, but they are often subverted.
I write in frequently to the morning show on KIRO radio especially, asking if they fact-checked the alarmist article they just read. There is never a response.
Because nothing shows that we are panicking more than apocalyptic language.
Because everyone knows that heating is worse than warming.
Because everyone knows that are readers are idiots and don’t understand big words.
We don’t want to risk our readers the idea that fish can be considered a product that man might be allowed to use.
We can’t permit our readers to even start to believe that there is any rational reason to disagree with what we are preaching.
They really are pulling out all the stockes. They must realize how badly they are losing.
Pulling out all the stops
Its instructive when a propaganda outlet admits it’s a propaganda outlet. They are saying that they don’t care about the opinions of any but their true believers.
Everyone knows that the only reason why Hitler sent his troops into Poland was to help with the local flower festival.
/sarc
The Guardian is extreme in diverse ways, and a first, perhaps second-order forcing of climate change, which some characterize as positive.
I heard they also instructed their staff to refer to Bill Shorten as ‘Australia’s Next Prime Minister’ and not ‘that idiot no one actually likes’.
Why to go Australian Labor Party. Run your campaign around Climate Action.
If it wasn’t 2am here I would be laughing pretty hard right now.
I have a few counter suggestions:
Use catastrophy fanatic instead of climate scientist.
Use garbage compactor instead of computer model or general circulation model.
Use climate terrorist instead of climate activist or climate warrior.
Use CO2 bull shit instead of CO2 forcing, where appropriate.
Never use the word, mitigate, but always use the word, intimidate in its place.
Readers, please feel free to add your own. I’m sure that I’ve missed quite a few.
+1
Double plus ungood.
Beware the Climate-geld
Editor Vivian must be trying to conjure up bad news out of benign news to coerce readers into paying the Guardian. In 2007, A Guardian article clearly explained: “The good news about bad news – it sells”
Citing Pew (2007): Two Decades of American News Preferences
Of “19 News Categories by Decade”, Pew found for those following “very closely” in 2000-2006, the top five categories were: “War/Terrorism (US Linked) 43%; Bad Weather 40%; Man made disasters 34%; Natural disasters 37%; and Money 40%”
So Vivian’s strategy to increase the Guardian’s revenue is to rewrite its editorial policies to very clearly appeal to these fear driven interests. i.e., transform benign/beneficial “global warming” into “Bad Weather” with “Man made disasters” and “Natural disasters”, all driven by the IPCC bureaucrats, “climaste” scientists, Greens, and news editors all demanding $ trillions in “Money” (aka “Dane-Geld”). Thus transform honest skeptical scientist into “climate science denier” or “climate denier” inferring the abhorrant “Holocaust denier.”
“Dane-geld” by Kipling
https://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2007/sep/04/thegoodnewsaboutbadnewsi
http://www.kiplingsociety.co.uk/poems_danegeld.htm
Great Australian election result where the least stupid parties look like clinging to Govt.
Just to be clear,
I am a climate science critic
I am a climate change definitional purist
I am a catastrophic manifesto challenger
I don’t believe in Santa, fairies, elves, unicorns, leprechauns, or Big Foot. Oh, I forgot, … and wind/solar “renewable-energy futures”, unless space aliens (which I DO believe in), at an advanced technological stage, decide that humans are worth the trouble to show how to do it.
I am a CO2 sinner who denies the need to be saved. I’m made of carbon, and I’m proud of it [should I do the T-shirt?].
I would add, for me anyway, I don’t believe in anything without evidence.
Just a simple slogan will do Robert.
I’ll take 3 T-shirts
Guardian Editorial Guidance:
When you have no verifiable evidence to support your position, call your opponents vile names and ban them from responding.
It’s the Graniad for gawd’s sake.
The fake news outlet that’s little more that mental massage for for hard of thinking.
Extreme activism being disguised as science and journalism. We are living in a time, of one of the biggest scandals in history. The blatantly biased media, abusing the freedom of the press to impose their extreme views on us with impunity…………….no entity to hold them accountable.
Maybe you noticed the picture and caption to the linked story/announcement.
“Melting Arctic ice forces animals to search for food on land, such as these polar bears in northern Russia.”
“The destruction of Arctic ecosystems forces animals to search for food on land, such as these polar bears in northern Russia. Photograph: Alexander Grir/AFP/Getty Images”
What they failed to mention is this:
https://www.thegwpf.org/as-polar-bear-numbers-increase-gwpf-calls-for-re-assessment-of-endangered-species-status/
“In 2005, the official global polar bear estimate was about 22,500.
Since 2005, however, the estimated global polar bear population has risen by more than 30% to about 30,000 bears, far and away the highest estimate in more than 50 years.
A growing number of observational studies have documented that polar bears are thriving, despite shrinking summer sea ice. “
Get your real polar bear science here:
https://polarbearscience.com/2019/02/27/state-of-the-polar-bear-report-2018-polar-bears-continue-to-thrive/
With the Australian Federal election now over, and with it the sad demise of Tony Abbott in the seat of Warringah. It took untold massive efforts by the ultra leftist group Getup to have him unseated. Others that had to contend with Getups targeted attacks have appeared to hold onto there seats. A complete waste of time money and resources by Getup.
But in the language of the New Gardian language guide Tony Abbott will still be current of assistance in his community As in his other roles as a surf life saver and a volunteer fire fighter. The man has great community spirit. Climate Disasters Guardian style, bring on the heavy seas, big waves and bushfires, we the comunity can handle them together as we have all ways done in this country in our own way. Tony commented he was going to assist soon with fuel reduction burns in his local area. That fighting fire with fire must be a concept alien in the new guardian lexicon and totally politically incorrect.
The new left only targeted the major city seats of a few dominant liberal coalition members with little result of only one scalp. The greens and labour will have to lick their wounds as their platform of a new climate change and high tax policies were treated with some distain by the average voter.
And Getup will not get away Scot free for their thuggish electioneering tacktics used in this election. The Big Fat Momma of the Australia Tax Office is looking at them for not paying tax on donations made to them. Which is the case for a body that does not have charity status. Any contribution to them is considered income. And can be subject to taxation. Though being free minded leftists they are crying already they don’t have to pay tax on donations to them. Being a political lobby group they cannot claim tax exemption status.
Rules are for the little people. They were never meant to apply to the self appointed saviors of mankind.
i got their email tonight patting themselves for ousting TA
curiously they refer TWICE to their supporting First Nations people
hmm? AUSTRALIANS call them ABORIGINALS OR Indigenous
so what OS / American wrote their email I wonder?
I was on a site called Agmates years ago then WE got infiltrate by them after the NO Coarbon tax rally across AUS to stop the carbon tax, they took over the webpage and locked the owner out, forcd a lot of topics to sectioned off areas and allowed trolling on all topical or climate posts.
theyve hated Abbott since those days. it was a targeted vendetta they admit
and they support some shiela whos prior is skiing and not much else?
but shes a malleable believer, and thats all they require.
Was anybody aware that a few climate scientists disagree strongly with this alarmistic language ( see some twitter accounts…)? Perhaps this can trigger a backfire: The “code” used by the Guardien will find some copyists around the world and many real climate scientists will defeat it. Or the other way around: who not defeats it is not a climate scientist. It could be have a positive outcome.