rabble blogs are the personal pages of some of Canada's most insightful progressive activists and commentators. All opinions belong to the writer; however, writers are expected to adhere to our guidelines. We welcome new bloggers -- contact us for details.

Progressive Economics Forum

Progressive Economics Forum's picture
The Progressive Economics Forum aims to promote the development of a progressive economics community in Canada. The PEF brings together over 200 progressive economists, working in universities, the labour movement and activist research organizations. Visit our website here.

Tales from the mouth of the Fraser: Climate change denial edition

| February 26, 2013
Tales from the mouth of the Fraser: Climate change denial edition

Some colleagues at the U.S. NGO Global Exchange tipped me off to some sneaky data doctoring done by the Fraser Institute on climate change. The source is Understanding Climate Change: Lesson Plans for the Classroom, a resource for high school teachers. The particular graph is on page 69 (first page if you click on Lesson 5), attributed to NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies.

The text comments only that "The graph illustrates that temperatures have risen over time, except during a cooling period between 1940 and 1970 (a period during which CO2 levels rose rapidly)." Later, the lesson plans prompts teachers to "ask students to draw conclusions from the data using positive analysis" and provides a full-page version that can be printed and handed out to a class. Several other graphs are presented with varying time horizons, each carefully presented to sow doubt about climate change while appearing to be objective and scientific.

But here is the exercise students should be asked: compare the Fraser's version of the graph with the original from the NASA Goddard Institute. In the original version, five-year means are emphasized as a way of smoothing out the larger fluctuations in annual data. In the Fraser version it is the reverse: by emphasizing annual data and downplaying the five-year means it looks more random, as if there has been little warming at all. Ironically, the intro to the Fraser lesson states: "Students will learn that data can be misused, whether by a selective use of data subsets or by graphing and charting tricks."

But the Fraser Institute is also guilty of omission. It's global warming we are talking about not American warming (although 2012 did top the charts as hottest year on record, highlighted by Hurricane Sandy and massive drought). Here is global data from the same source, which was passed over by the Fraser's lesson plan:

The Fraser's lesson plans show a few other graphs over longer time horizons that infer warming is normal and probably not caused by humans. In fact, there is scientific consensus on precisely the opposite. Why any teacher would use these materials in their classroom is beyond me, when there are many other lesson plans from credible institutions. But it also shows some of the secrets of the Fraser Institute's success: they publish materials that sound scientific and well-reasoned when they are actually fronting for corporate interests who profit from sowing confusion among the public.



Meme, I'd love to know what remarkable epiphany turned you around 180 degrees. What scientific revelation could have produced such an emotional reversal? How could a former "believer" in the threat of rapid global climate change come to believe that hypothetical emotional damage is a greater threat than observable massive disruptions in our environment? I remember the Cold War. I remember the Fear. And i remember how that fear was harnassed to turn us away from something truly unthinkable. And here we are again.

The real problem you remaining climate change believers have is your grandkids explaining you to their grandkids exactly the same way you would explain Reefer Madness to your grandkids.  “I see the signs!” “We cannot deny the change!” Right now you doomers look like the last fella ever to show up to the party still dressed in disco duds. Nice job girls. You held a spear of CO2 fear to our children’s backs just to make sure they turned the lights out more often and stayed “environ MENTAL y aware.

How many climate blame believers did it take to change a light bulb? None but they did have full consensus that it would change, maybe.

How will history judge Climate Blame Belief?

-History will note that not one single IPCC warning ever said the end of the world would or will happen, only might and could happen. Check for yourself.

-History will note that your solution to what we all knew was an exaggeration was to tax the air we breathe with bankster funded and corporate run carbon trading stock markets ruled by politicians.

-Worst of all, (besides asking why climate blame wasn’t a war crime), is the embarrassment of history remembering us all for begging “OUR” politicians to make the ultimate election promise: To force us to sacrifice our lifestyles to control the climate so the weather is colder and “tamed”.  

Modern day witch burning perhaps?

FORMER climate blame believers are better planet lovers.

*Occupywallstreet does not even mention CO2 in its list of demands because of the bank-funded carbon trading stock markets ruled by corporations and trustworthy politicians

*Canada killed Y2Kyoto with a freely elected climate change denying prime minister and nobody cared, especially the millions of scientists warning us of unstoppable warming (a comet hit).

Login or register to post comments