Oh, what fun! We’re back to recycling old smear tactics against skeptics.
Greenpeace has a ….. well, I don’t know what it is. Just a bunch of old recycled smears. Which is fine. Most are from the self-delusion that most skeptic voices are funded by the sinister “BIG OIL“!!! And, they attack some personalities in the skeptic community. You don’t me to list them, you know them by heart.
It’s a collection of history revisionism, smears, and irrelevant factoids. If I wasn’t so tired I’d just go line by line destroying most of them, but, I don’t really have to because it’s all been done already. Well, they do add some things I wasn’t familiar with, like in their “Part 2: Denier Tricks and Tactics” apparently, the ever tricky Sallie Baliunas, Willie Soon, David Legates and Tim Ball tricked the world by publishing a viewpoint in the journal “Ecological Complexity” in 2007, dastardly, I know. They had the audacity to say
They argued that scientific modelling [sic] showing polar bear populations were threatened by climate change could not be trusted. They went on to question not only the climate science showing that the Arctic was warming and sea ice was decreasing, but also tried to show that things like tourism were a much bigger threat to polar bears than the disappearance of their habitat.
They also criticized the work because, because…. Exxon!!!! That’s why!! And, there were a couple of fellows who disagreed with them, so there! Well, those guys certainly can’t trick Greenpeace! But, Greenpeace seems to have left some things out. Namely, that the polar bear population is growing. As it turns out, at least on the points about the poor polly bears, the skeptics were right, hunting is a greater threat to polar bears, even if Exxon one time funded one of those guys. Weird!
Then Greenpeace resorts to their own bit of trickery.
CAN’T PUBLISH A PEER-REVIEWED ARTICLE? SELF-PUBLISH A BOOK.
In the absence of their ability to publish real science in peer reviewed scientific journals (not least because so many of the climate denial scientists are not actual climate scientists and the lobbyists are not experts) ……
Hmm, so those 1100+ papers at poptech’s don’t really exist? More than that, Dr. Lindzen isn’t published? Dr. Christy isn’t published? Dr. Spencer isn’t published? and on and on ….. For those who may not know, yes, they are all skeptics, experts in the climate field, and collectively they probably have somewhere between 500-1000 published themselves. But, about those non-experts …. people should ask Dr. Steig if they can or can’t get papers published.
It seems, Greenpeace is exercising some tricks of their own in putting out this so tiresome bit of propaganda.
There’s much more to laugh at Greenpeace about. Most of the arguments, we know by rote already, anyway. So, if they ever convince someone else of their lunacy, we can expect to have some more fun at alarmist expense!