Who Killed Copenhagen?

1. Who Killed Copenhagen? A Coroner’s Report on Science Disinformation, Media Manipulation and an Industry Bent on Denial Richard Littlemore January 28, 2010

2. Pop Quiz A Remedial Test of Climate Politics Awareness (to be taken seriously but not personally)

3. Who said: “The scientific basis for the greenhouse effect and the potential impact of human emissions of greenhouse gases such as CO2 on climate is well established and cannot be denied.”

4. Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, Chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

5. Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, Chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change • Dr. James Hansen, Director NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies

6. Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, Chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change • Dr. James Hansen, Director NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies • Dr. David Suzuki, Canadian Environmental Icon

7. Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, Chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change • Dr. James Hansen, Director NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies • Dr. David Suzuki, Canadian Environmental Icon • Leonard S. Bernstein, senior scientist (in 1995) of Mobil Corporation (now Exxon Mobil)

8. Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, Chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change • Dr. James Hansen, Director NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies • Dr. David Suzuki, Canadian Environmental Icon • Leonard S. Bernstein, senior scientist (in 1995) of Mobil Corporation (now Exxon Mobil)

9. Who said: “Those who think we are powerless to do anything about the greenhouse effect forget about the ‘White House effect.’ As president, I intend to do something about it.”

10. Bill Clinton, campaigning against George H.W. Bush in 1992

11. Bill Clinton, campaigning against George H.W. Bush in 1992 Al Gore, campaigning against George W. Bush in 2000

12. Bill Clinton, campaigning against George H.W. Bush in 1992 Al Gore, campaigning against George W. Bush in 2000 Barack Obama, running against John McCain in 2007

13. Bill Clinton, campaigning against George H.W. Bush in 1992 Al Gore, campaigning against George W. Bush in 2000 Barack Obama, running against John McCain in 2007 George H.W. Bush, campaigning against Michael Dukakis in 1988

14. Bill Clinton, campaigning against George H.W. Bush in 1992 Al Gore, campaigning against George W. Bush in 2000 Barack Obama, running against John McCain in 2007 George H.W. Bush, campaigning against Michael Dukakis in 1988

15. What corporation created The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition (TASSC) to: “Encourage the public to question—from the grassroots up—the validity of scientific studies.”

16. Monsanto Corporation – to protect itself against lawsuits over the danger of PCBs

17. Monsanto Corporation – to protect itself against lawsuits over the danger of PCBs Philip Morris – to deflect U.S. legislation against second-hand smoke

18. Monsanto Corporation – to protect itself against lawsuits over the danger of PCBs Philip Morris – to deflect U.S. legislation against second-hand smoke General Electric – to safeguard its nuclear energy investment

19. Monsanto Corporation – to protect itself against lawsuits over the danger of PCBs Philip Morris – to deflect U.S. legislation against second-hand smoke General Electric – to safeguard its nuclear energy investment ExxonMobil – to distract Americans from thinking about climate change

20. Monsanto Corporation – to protect itself against lawsuits over the danger of PCBs Philip Morris – ah ha! You thought number 4 was always the right answer General Electric – to safeguard its nuclear energy investment ExxonMobil – to distract Americans from thinking about climate change

21. Who did Philip Morris solicit to join in in TASSC, to help fight the fight for “sound science”?

22. ExxonMobil

23. ExxonMobil Monsanto Corporation

24. ExxonMobil Monsanto Corporation General Electric

25. ExxonMobil Monsanto Corporation General Electric All of the above

26. ExxonMobil Monsanto Corporation General Electric All of the above All of the above, plus 20,000 other companies just like them

27. ExxonMobil Monsanto Corporation General Electric All of the above All of the above, plus 20,000 other companies just like them

28. What percentage of peer-reviewed scientific journal articles, written between 1993 and 2003 took issue with the theory of global warming?

29. 53 per cent

30. 53 per cent 37 per cent

31. 53 per cent 37 per cent 16 per cent

32. 53 per cent 37 per cent 16 per cent 0 (zero) per cent – which is to say none, nada, not a single frickin’ paper in 10 years.

33. 53 per cent 37 per cent 16 per cent 0 (zero) per cent – I know! It’s outrageous, isn’t it?

34. What percentage of mainstream newspaper articles during the same period presented a more “balanced” view, quoting an “expert” on one side and an “expert” on the other?

35. 53 per cent

36. 53 per cent 37 per cent

37. 53 per cent 37 per cent 16 per cent

38. 53 per cent 37 per cent 16 per cent 0 (zero) per cent – be serious: by now you must know that these questions are a set up.

39. 53 per cent 37 per cent 16 per cent 0 (zero) per cent – be serious: by now you must know that these questions are a set up.

40. Western Fuels Association Information Council on the Environment 1991 “Some say the Earth is warming. Some also said the Earth was flat.” “Who told you the Earth was warming? … Chicken Little?” “How much are you willing to pay to solve a problem that may not exist?” “If the Earth is getting warmer, why is Minneapolis getting colder?”

41. “Doubt is our product, since it is the best means of competing with the ‘body of fact’ that exists in the mind of the general public. It is also the means of establishing a controversy.” Brown and Williamson Tobacco Company memo 1960s

42. The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition • Establish TAASC as a credible source for reporters when questioning the validity of scientific studies • Encourage the public to question – from the grassroots up – the validity of scientific studies • Mobilize support for TAASC through alliances with other organizations and third party allies 1992

43. American Petroleum Institute Victory Will be Achieved When: • Average citizens “understand” (recognize) uncertainties in climate science; uncertainties become part of the “conventional wisdom” • Media “understands” (recognizes) uncertainties in climate science • Media coverage recognizes balance on climate science and recognition of the validity of viewpoints that challenge the current “conventional wisdom” 1998

44. Number of scientific studies dealing with “climate change” published in scientific journals during the previous ten years: Number disagreeing with the global consensus that greenhouse gas pollution has caused most of the warming of the last 50 years: Science, December 3, 2004 Vol. 306, Issue 5702,1686

45. Peer-reviewed, scientific articles: Articles in the popular press: Have they succeeded? Percentage in doubt as to cause: Percentage in doubt as to cause: No wonder people are confused

46. Frank Luntz- Straight Talk 2002 • The Scientific Debate remains open. Voters believe that there is no consensus about global warming within the scientific community. Should the public come to believe that the scientific issues are settled, their views about global warming will change accordingly. Therefore you need to continue to make the lack of scientific certainty a primary issue in the debate, and defer to scientists and other experts in the field.

48. Stolen Emails • “I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.” Phil Jones Director of the Climatic Research Unit East Anglia University

49. Stolen Emails ClimateGate: The final nail in the coffin of “anthropgenic global warming”? - The Telegraph ClimateGate: Caught Green-Handed - The SPPInstitute ClimateGate and the elitist roots of global warming alarmism - Roy Spencer’s Global Warming blog

50. GlacierGate First ClimateGate, now GlacierGate - Lorne Gunter, the National Post GlacierGate threatens Climate Change - The Australian