Climate Change Conspiracy Theorist's Report "A Pile Of Horse Shit" Writes Environment Editor

authordefault
on

BEN CUBBY, the environment editor at Australia’s Sydney Morning Herald newspaper, admits he has an unusual problem – โ€œhow does one critically analyse a pile of horseย shit?โ€

The horse excretion in question is a report – CSIROh! – Climate of Deception or First Step to Freedom –ย sent to Cubby by one of Australia’s most tireless – and some might say tiresome – climate science deniers, Malcolm Roberts. But more of Ben Cubby’s responseย later.

Malcolm Roberts is the volunteer project manager for theย Galileo Movementย – a climate science denial organisation whose patron is popular Sydney radio shock-jock Alan Jones who himself thinks human-causedย climateย changeย is a โ€œhoaxโ€ and โ€œwitchcraftโ€.

Roberts’ โ€œreportโ€ appears to have been sparked by anย email from ABC Brisbane radio presenter Steve Austinย back in Februaryย 2010.

โ€œFor some time now I have been receiving a barrage of your unsolicited emails about climate change and your analysis of IPCC flaws,โ€ wrote Austin, who attached a copy of a CSIRO report on climate change and suggested Roberts respond. Austin promises he’ll send that response to the CSIRO and provide any feedback heย gets.

Roberts is a former coal miner and management consultant and in a declaration of ย interestsย writes: โ€œFor extensive work performed in the mining industry I was paid money by mining companies (including three government-owned coal mining companies)โ€ฆ.โ€ He claims to have foregone more than a million dollars in earnings for his unpaid work researching climateย change.

Part of that research involved him travelling to the US to attend the Heartland Institute’s climate skeptics conference in New York in 2008, co-sponsored by Australian free market think-tank the Institute of Public Affairs. Well, three years pass since the exchange with Steve Austin and finally Roberts sends him the report, which he must have been hanging outย for.

But here’s a prediction. Whatever the CSIRO or any other reputable research institution says to Malcolm Roberts about human-caused climate change, Roberts will not accept it.ย Why?

Because if you scan the hundreds of pages of โ€œappendicesโ€ attached to Robert’s report, you’ll find he regards the whole human-caused climate change thing as a conspiracy. It’s a hoax devised by international bankers and socialists hell bent on installing a New Worldย Order.ย 

In short, the motivation for the whole science of human-caused climate change is down to a heady mix of โ€œinternational bankersโ€, โ€œsocialistsโ€ and a desire for โ€œglobal controlโ€. There are 19 completed appendices. One of them, Appendix 14, is 135 pages long and seeks to explain the motivation behind what Roberts habitually describes as the โ€œclimate fraudโ€ being committed by scientists across the world, by a โ€œfraudulentโ€ United Nations. ย โ€œNature alone determines levels of CO2 in air,โ€ he claims, ignoring the 33 billion tonnes of CO2 emitted in the last year alone from burning fossil fuels and makingย cement.

โ€œThe core problem is massive over-government through international bankers seeking toย control,โ€ writes Roberts. โ€œWe now know WHY they push climate fraud. Theyโ€™re pushing globalย control.โ€

Roberts wraps this whole global conspiracy theory neatly into a heading for one section: โ€œThe objective is global control through global socialist governance by international bankers hiding control behindย environmentalismโ€.

At one point, Roberts claims that โ€œitโ€™s likely that during John Howardโ€™s (Australian) prime ministership socialist bureaucrats pulled the stringsโ€ which leaves you wondering why these evil socialist puppet masters failed to get Howard to sign the United Nations’ Kyotoย protocol?

What else have the New World Order been up to? According to Roberts, โ€œkey American Presidents and bureaucrats have spent billions ofย dollars on killing or injuring hundreds of millions of people and brutally forcing sterilisationย and/or abortions on tens of millions ofย peopleโ€.

Now, the Galileo Movement says on Twitter that the report wasn’t an official Galileo Movement document. They are distancing themselves from the work of their own project manager. News Ltd commentator and climate science mangler Andrew Bolt has already pulled the pin on his โ€œadvisorโ€ status with the Galileo Movement over what Bolt claimed was Roberts’ โ€œanti-semiticโ€ conspiracy theory over Jewish bankers ruling financial systems. Roberts insists he is notย anti-Jewish.

There is at least one group happy to align itself with Roberts’ version of climate change science. Theย Mine Managers Association of Australiaย writes appreciatively on its website how Roberts, a โ€œlong-standing memberโ€, has been โ€œwaging ‘war’ againstย politicians for allegedly misleading the public on the issue of anthropogenic globalย warmingโ€.

The association provides its members a link to one of Roberts’ previous reports and then describes as โ€œnonsenseโ€ the idea that carbon dioxide might be linked to climateย change.

In recent weeks, Roberts has been sending out copies of his report to every Australian member of parliament, state premiers, scientists he doesn’t like,ย journalistsย he doesn’t like,ย journalistsย he does like (Andrew Bolt and Alan Jones among them), the bosses of media organisations and the CSIRO and the Bureau ofย Meteorology.

Some politicians are singled out for special attention. Climate Change Minister Greg Combet, Prime Minister Julia Gillard and Shadow Minister for Broadband and Communications Malcolm Turnbull are among those sent letters demanding they โ€œresign from parliamentย immediatelyโ€.

In a letter to ABC managing director Mark Scott, Roberts saysย unless the ABC can give him โ€œempirical scientific evidence and logical scientific reasoning proving that damaging warming was/is/will be caused by human CO2โ€ then the ABC should retract every story on human-caused climate change they’ve everย done.

Ten prominent scientists also get a copy of Roberts’ report, which includes the faintlyย narcissisticย demand that if they fail to prove that human-caused climateย changeย exists to his satisfaction, then โ€œby Friday, March 1st, 2013 I will assume you do not disagree with myย report.โ€

Some journalists, including Ben Cubby, SMH columnist Mike Carlton and ABC identities Robyn Williams, Dr Karl Kruszelnicki and Wendy Carlisle, have had โ€œlawful noticiesโ€ demanding they โ€œwithdrawโ€ any past claims about CO2 damaging the climate. โ€œIf you continue making such claims and fail to retract past claims you will be knowingly misleading the public and parliament,โ€ writes Roberts, expectantly. Roberts has started posting responsesย on his website.ย He either hasn’t had too many, or he’s a bit slow on theย upload.

In any case, the only reply of any substance so far comes in two emails from a fawning and grateful Alan Jones, who was recently told by broadcasting authorities to take fact-checking lessons on climate change. Jones describes Roberts as a โ€œmagnificent workerโ€ and an โ€œinspiring individualโ€ and adds: โ€œThe hoax is more obvious today than it everย was.โ€

Which brings us back to Ben Cubby, one of theย journalistsย who has been on the receiving end of reams ofย conspiratorialย theorising from Roberts. Cubby’s response hasn’t been posted yet, but I’ll provide it here in full. In my view, it affords these conspiracy theories the contempt theyย deserve.

Malcolm-Ieuan,

In considering your request that I identify errors in the report you sent to me – CSIROh! Climate of Deception? Or First Step to Freedom? – I find myself confronting an unusual problem: how does one critically analyse a pile of horse shit?

Even by the exceedingly low standards of Australiaโ€™s climate skeptic community, your report is dire. You direct me to Appendix 13. It is littered with errors of all kinds: a mish-mash of muddled conjecture, impossible leaps of logic, fundamental misunderstandings of the scientific method, misread and misquoted research that has been poorly cited, internal contradictions, confused dates, spelling mistakes, and strangled grammar. It is, in all respects, a dud.ย 

I am not going to comply with your demand that I โ€˜โ€˜identify, specify and justifyโ€™โ€™ all the errors in your report. There are too many. However, this should not be read as a reluctance on my part to address your complaints. You will recall that, many months ago, you asked me to provide you with some empirical evidence of human-induced climate change, and I immediately sent you a series of peer-reviewed papers that did just that.

You responded, a month later, after lengthy consultation with your science advisor Tim Ball (not โ€˜โ€˜Tim Tallโ€™โ€™, as you call him in your report). You advanced an unpublished and frankly bizarre theory about underwater volcanoes. Apparently these hidden volcanoes conveniently rumbled to life at just the right rate to mimic both the rise and isotopic signature of human-generated atmospheric CO2. With theories like this, it is not difficult to see why even other climate skeptics have distanced themselves from your work.

Your report tries to allege that there are factual errors in my reporting. If you honestly believe this, there is a fairly simple way to deal with it: request a correction from the newspaper. Your requests will be independently considered on their merits by people other than me.ย It is remarkable that you allege thousands of errors, spanning a period of several years, yet have not sought to address them in this straightforward, transparent way.

You demand I declare my โ€˜โ€˜personal financial interests in advocating the claim that human CO2 should be cutโ€™โ€™. First, Iโ€™m not advocating anything in particular, apart from fact-based reporting. Second, I have no financial interest in any industry related to emissions cuts. Nor have I worked for coal companies, as you have.

As Iโ€™ve made clear in earlier replies to your many emails, I donโ€™t mind a civil discussion about environment reporting or climate change. But until you start to ground your opinions in fact, I will continue to regard your correspondence as amusing spam.

Related Posts

on

Tech firms like Amazon and Google โ€˜have enormous responsibilityโ€™ for driving fossil fuel expansions, climate expert argues.

Tech firms like Amazon and Google โ€˜have enormous responsibilityโ€™ for driving fossil fuel expansions, climate expert argues.
on

The Tory candidate is running her campaign from the home of a prominent anti-green activist.

The Tory candidate is running her campaign from the home of a prominent anti-green activist.
on

Peter Thiel, JD Vanceโ€™s former boss, also expresses confusion on climate, supporting expanded fossil fuel use while appearing unclear on the consequences.

Peter Thiel, JD Vanceโ€™s former boss, also expresses confusion on climate, supporting expanded fossil fuel use while appearing unclear on the consequences.
on

An emergency preparedness conference in Ottawa hosted two days of panels with only limited discussion of climate changeโ€™s root causes.

An emergency preparedness conference in Ottawa hosted two days of panels with only limited discussion of climate changeโ€™s root causes.