Skip to content
Archive of entries posted on 23rd November 2009

Picking up steam

The National Post has now picked up the CRU hacked/leaked email story.

First we have Terence CorcoranAfter Copenhagen, the end of the science:

Clearly climate science is not Louis Pasteur in his lab or Alexander Fleming searching for antibiotics and discovering penicillin. Providing the proof for man-made global warming is big business and big politics, backed by hundreds of billions of dollar and deep ideological convictions. Have the convictions overtaken the search for scientific proof? The CRU emails, while no smoking gun of fraud and malfeasance, can only add to the already mounting scientific and popular skepticism.

The coming end of certainty over man-made warming was already a possibility before the CRU events. The idea that the science is not settled, or that it is incomplete and uncertain, shows up in many places, even among the true believers

The Post also offers Climategate which provides some background to the story, and Myron Ebell’s CRU’s climate ‘tricks’, which I’m interpreting to be a sarcastic parody of the Warmists’ response.

At the very least the Climate-Change pushers have to acknowledge that the science is NOT settled and there is plenty of room for healthy skepticism.

Now we’re looking forward to hearing from others in Canadian media. What are you waiting for?  Or do you have so much invested that you are afraid to confront the possibility that you may have been duped?

Meanwhile, ChuckerCanuk opines on what Canada would look like now if Stephane Dion had managed to implement his Green Shift.

Bam! Now go to sleep.

*   *   *   *

Update:

Inhofe Says He Will Call for Investigation on “Climategate” on Washington Times Americas Morning Show – EPW (H/T Craig)

*   *   *   *

Tuesday Update:

Lots of good stuff this morning. While Al Gore continues to preach his propaganda at the Red Star and blasts Alberta’s Oil Sands (“…But, you know, junkies find veins in their toes”), we find that even  George Monbiot is admitting that he should have been more skeptical (via Watts up with That – H/T Daryl).

As Andrew Bolt writes:

Scepticism is the essential disposition of our craft, yet too many journalists have abandoned it. Remember: the opposite of sceptical is gullible.

CTV seems to be supporting the Warmists with a token report discussing hackers cherry-picking data out of context. Perhaps they should check out Monbiot. (H/T Springer who has a link to a Glenn Beck report)

Obama’s Science Czar John Holdren involved in unwinding “Climategate” scandalCanada Free Press (H/T Bruce):

...Obama Science Czar John Holdren is directly involved in CRU’s unfolding Climategate scandal. In fact, according to files released by a CEU hacker or whistleblower, Holdren is involved in what Canada Free Press (CFP) columnist Canadian climatologist Dr. Tim Ball terms “a truculent and nasty manner that provides a brief demonstration of his lack of understanding, commitment on faith and willingness to ridicule and bully people”…

Global warming with the lid offWall Street Journal:

Some of those mentioned in the emails have responded to our requests for comment by saying they must first chat with their lawyers. Others have offered legal threats and personal invective. Still others have said nothing at all. Those who have responded have insisted that the emails reveal nothing more than trivial data discrepancies and procedural debates.

Yet all of these nonresponses manage to underscore what may be the most revealing truth: That these scientists feel the public doesn’t have a right to know the basis for their climate-change predictions, even as their governments prepare staggeringly expensive legislation in response to them...

Why You Should Be Hot and Bothered About ‘Climate-gate’ - John Loft, Fox News

Peter Foster: Let the climate debate begin - National Post (H/T Bruce)

*   *   *   *

Also please check out Alex Jones’ Infowars.

Donolo’s conundrum

Liz J has very perceptively analyzed Peter Donolo’s strategy to turn Iffy’s elitist image into a positive, and juxtaposed it with Monte Solberg’s latest column – Grits must step up on the double-double.

Solberg is saying that you need to appeal to the Tim Hortons crowd to get your message across. Donolo seems to think it would be wiser to set Iffy above the common folk and allow us to all marvel in awe at the gems that escape from his superior brain.

The Liberals have several challenges right now. Their messages do not resonate with Canadians. Moreover they are hampered with a leader who was never actually elected to the position. He was dumped there with very little political experience. He is like a fish out of water as he flounders and twitches in the brutal spotlight of Canadian politics.

Donolo’s task is daunting, if not impossible. What he should be doing is attempting a reverse-Pygmalion, but Iffy is so out of touch and has been out of the country for far too long to really understand the average Canadian.

Liz J observes:

There’s not much hope on the horizon with Donolo at Iggy’s service with his attitude towards the common folk who frequent coffee shops.

I won’t tell the brains running the Liberal party to go to Hell, they’re already there. Proliferating a boorish attitude by implying their man Iggy is above the coffee shop patrons is not going to rise them from the abyss.

The best Peter Donolo can do is to hide Iffy far away from the merciless glare of the House of Commons and hope he doesn’t cause much damage.

Stay tuned for the Never-ending Iffy Road Tour – coming soon to a trendy little Cappuccino bar near you.

*   *   *   *

*   *   *   *

Update:

Featured comment by Mississauga Tom:

Solberg is so right. The Cons understand “double-double”. The Libs just chase “trouble-trouble”.

Heh. I have such clever readers.

If anyone uses that, please give Tom proper credit.

*   *   *   *

Tuesday Update:

Liberals need time to find vision and spine John Ibbitson:

…Beyond lack of focus, or lack of political will, is the question of purpose. Simply put, and many are putting it: What do the Liberals stand for?

What direction would they take the country that differs from the ruthlessly pragmatic (and, arguably, visionless) approach of the current government?

“What’s in it for me?” asks the guy nursing his double-double at a suburban-anywhere strip mall, or the immigrant Canadian struggling to make it in this cold, new land, or the senior fighting to stay in her own home…

(Link found on NNW but it doesn’t seem to be working now.)