Global Warming Deniers (and their extreme right-wing enablers) are showing their desperation. Rather than continue with simply confusing people with distortion of data (lies, damn lies, statistics, and statistics from Global Warming deniers), we have before us a case of deliberate doctoring of evidence to distort events. For too many in the American right wing, hatred of Al Gore exceeds any ability to or willingness to contemplate reality. Thus, the efforts for the creation of a new "reality" that is more acceptable to the deniers.

As well documented in the WonkRoom, the Business & Media Institutes has made waves with the right wing denial world with a distorted misrepresentation of an Al Gore interview on NPR. The distortion extended to splicing separation pieces of the interview together to create a sentence, comments that Gore never made. Of course, with this being the Right-Wing Sound Machine, the deception didn't stop with BMI, but went to Drudge, Fox, and other venues.

Hillary Clinton supporters seem to have become the equivalent of global warming deniers in Democratic politics. If facts don't suit your argument, insist on the opposite. And even more importantly, insist that your non-facts get at least 50% of the coverage.

They're at it again.  Over at ICECAP, a site that claims to not be made up of global warming deniers, but turns out to host some of the biggest names in the global warming denial field that get serious $$$ from the oil companies, Joseph D'Aleo (a meteorologist, not climate scientist) put up their latest lie.  This graph is the brunt of their argument.

See??  There's no correlation between temperatures and CO2 output!

Debunking after the fold.

So, we're coming to the end of another year.  We've learned a lot about our world this year, and not all of it is good news.  Scientists are predicting that it will only be 5-6 years before Arctic summers are ice-free.  2007 was the second-hottest year on record.  Climate change is resulting in more natural disasters, and affecting wildlife and humans alike.  Through his movie An Inconvenient Truth, Al Gore did his damndest to sound the alarm about climate change, and get us to realize that we can take action.

Predictably, his movie was barely out before big oil-funded free market think tanks were scrambling to refute everything the movie - and the science - was saying.  "AL GORE IS A NAZI!" they screamed on Fox News.  "DON'T BELIEVE HIM!".

There were even documentaries made to present a "balanced" view to the public, parroting James Inhofe (R-Exxon)'s famous babble that climate change is a hoax.  Glenn Beck hosted "A Climate of Fear" on CNN (with hilariously dismal ratings).  And, in the UK, "The Great Global Warming Swindle" was aired on ITV's Channel 4.  The makers trotted out the usual suspects, "scientists" who are prominent members of the Global Warming Deniers Hall of Shame, like Patrick Michaels ("[Gore's movie is a] riveting work of science fiction") and John Christy (co-author of Global Warming and Other Eco-Myths).

Despite all of this, the truth still prevails (even on the cover of Newsweek);  despite the fact that the US federal government is abysmal at reducing carbon emissions and admitting the truth about climate change, a number of governors around the nation have decided to take matters into their own hands, including several Republicans.  Arnold Schwarzenegger is one;  Charlie Crist, the Republican governor of Florida, is another (read about his climate initiatives here).

So Crist's cabinet must have been scratching their collective heads and saying "Um, thanks.  Really, you shouldn't have... really!" when they received a very special holiday gift from Florida Attorney General (and former Republican Congressman) Bill McCollum:

Attorney General Bill McCollum isn't buying Gov. Charlie Crist's belief that global warming is a threat to Florida and the world. Shortly before Christmas, McCollum sent a memo (Word file) to Crist and the other Cabinet members, advising them that "the science is not all in" on the subject and urging them to view the enclosed DVD, a British television documentary called The Great Global Warming Swindle. (It costs $19.99, and this is not exactly "It's a Wonderful Life.")

The letter is short:

Thank you for the opportunity to participate in our recent climate change workshops.  

While many believe the science of global warming is undisputed, I would encourage you to view the attached DVD documentary.

Your leadership on this important issue is appreciated.

Dude, let me repeat:  your own governor gets it.  He was the first Florida governor to get it.  He's even a Republican.  The rest of his cabinet gets it, so why don't you?

No offense, but I'm sure those DVDs will make nice coasters or Frisbees.

(H/T to diarist kansasr.)

Last night I watched 20/20. I haven't watched it in a long time and now I know why. The first segment was a bit about a woman who had a heart attach and was comatose. Just as her husband was contemplating taking her off life support, she awakens and recovers. They interview nurses and family members and the conclusion: a miracle! Where is the interview with the neurosurgeon or someone who could explain what happened? Now all kinds of people will continue indefinitely on life support in hopes of the "miracle"! They didn't spend enough time on her rehab and made it seem like she is normal now. Her chances of a recurrence? They didn't say!

Then came Stossel's hit piece on Global Warming.

(Cross-posted from OpenLeft)

A network of anti-global warming activists is gearing up for yet another assault on the scientific consensus that global warming is real, and has a significant human-caused component.

Their chosen vehicle is a not-yet-published paper claiming to "update" and essentially overturn historian of science Naomi Oreskes 2004 finding that there was no opposition to the consensus view in a representative sample of 928 peer-reviewed articles whose abtracts she surveyed.

This is the second of a three-part series.  Part I is here.  And Part II picks up just over the fold...

The sound machine of Global Warming denialists and skeptics is revving up. There are two new items that are certain to be rocketing around the globe within certain circles 'proving', somehow, that Global Warming isn't real and that actions to prevent it are misguided.

• Ted Schulte's attack on Naomi Oreskes' work about Global Warming consensus in the scientific literature; and,
• Bjorn Lomborg's new book, Cool It.

What is striking about both of these works is their seemingly straightforward willingness to misrepresent, selectively quote, misconstrue information to support their claims and therefore to present an entirely misleading (false) case.  A false case that will trumpeted and circulated by too many who won't take the time to question what they see.

(Cross-posted from OpenLeft)

British MD Makes Shocking Discovery: Climate Scientists Newly Doubtful About Holocaust!

A network of anti-global warming activists is gearing up for yet another assault on the scientific consensus that global warming is real, and has a significant human-caused component So far, the network has visible nodes in Senator James Inhofe's Environmental and Public Works (EPW) Committee Minority Staff, in the tech blogosphere, and in a fringe science journal devoted to pushing denialist views.

Their chosen vehicle is a not-yet-published paper claiming to "update" and essentially overturn historian of science Naomi Oreskes 2004 finding that there was no opposition to the consensus view in a representative sample of 928 peer-reviewed articles whose abtracts she surveyed.  Yet, despite the secrecy and overblown claims, enough of the contents have already spilled out to discredit the study.  One paper cited as rejecting the consensus was not even about climate science, but about public attitudes regarding climate science debates.

What’s This About The Holocaust???       JUMP!-->

Hi, New Scientist? Yes, I would like to order 300 million copies of your Climate Change: Guide for the perplexed.   Yes, and please send about 200 copies to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue,  NW, Washington, DC 20500.

New Scientist's upcoming issue will include what is by far the most comprehensive debunking of the global warming myths, continuously used by the small handful of so-called "experts" who say either: a) global warming isn't happening; (b) humans are not too blame, and anything in between.

Ever wondered about "medieval warming?" "The Little Ice Age?" "Cosmic Rays?" And of the other denier messages? Check out the New Scientist here, save them to the hard drive and get the message out.

This is a DeSmogBlog front line dispatch.

Scientists are the Bad Guys.

This is the new talking point for the Exxon-Mobil lobby, as evidenced by the director of a new "documentary" to be shown on British television entitled "The Great Global Warming Swindle".  Here's how that director, Martin Durkin, characterized his film:

Controversial director Martin Durkin said: "You can see the problems with the science of global warming, but people just don't believe you - it's taken 10 years to get this commissioned.

"I think it will go down in history as the first chapter in a new era of the relationship between scientists and society. Legitimate scientists - people with qualifications - are the bad guys.

"It is a big story that is going to cause controversy.

"It's very rare that a film changes history, but I think this is a turning point and in five years the idea that the greenhouse effect is the main reason behind global warming will be seen as total bollocks.

(cont.)

I've had it with arguing with skeptics.  It's like whac-a-mole.  You squash one ill-informed comment, 10 more pop up in its place.  Our local papers have had some global warming articles recently, and I've been arguing the global warming case to the ill-informed.  It's alright when you are joined by many others on the comment thread who are arguing the same case.  But it's not so good when the threads get overrun by global warming deniers.

I read hekebolos' diary last week, http://www.dailykos.com/...

He made the case that we needed to use fear against the deniers.  So I started to respond to a denier with that tactic.  I faltered as I composed the comment.  I felt like a fear-mongerer.  I felt like I was playing right into the hands of "State of Fear" mindset.  I didn't feel like it was the right approach.  I discarded the comment and went on my way.

Over the next few days, though, it kept going around in my head.

Link

Just saw this, thought it was worth posting.  Exxon-Mobil is paying scientists to deny the truth.

The Washington Post seems to have a bizarre love-hate relationship with Global Warming Skeptics.

The paper's formal statements, its editorials, are increasingly clear that Global Warming is real, it creates real problem and danger, and we must act.

The paper's reporters often foster false controversy, writing in a style that fosters doubt as to the scientific consensus behind Global Warming.

And the OPEDs and letters ... when it comes to these valuable spaces, The Post seems dedicated to ensuring "balance" on an issue where this media ideal distorts reality.

And, today was no exception.

We must solve the problem of global warming without arousing Republican fears.

"This isn’t a smoking gun; climate is a battalion of intergalactic smoking missiles."

Anthropogenic global warming can not be prevented with legislation untill we overcome the enormous partisan divide in this country about its existence, even among educated Republicans.

fully 43% of Republicans with a college degree say that there is no evidence of global warming, compared with 24% of Republicans with less education.

Why is this? Don't educated Republicans know any scientists? Don't they get National Geographic? Don't their vineyards fail? Don't their kids get asthma? There is something more powerfull fueling this denial hysteria.

Follow me down to an really interesting solution that does not fuel their fear.

Vanity Fair has an article by Mark Hertsgaard, While Washington Slept, in its most recent edition which spells out the connection between the scientists who helped the Tobacco lobby fend off legislation and regulation of cigarettes and other tobacco products, and those who now seek to create a controversy about the causes of global warming. Indeed, in many cases, they are literally the same people: (More below the fold)