Climate Change Deniers Appointed to Top Boards

... well reading this made me feel the need to make a post! Straight from a Green Party news release.

OTTAWA--In another behind the scenes attack on science, the Conservative government has appointed well-known climate change deniers to key funding agency positions, setting the stage for shutting down much needed research in Canada. "I am unfortunately not surprised by this newest outrage," said Elizabeth May, Leader of Canada’s Greens. "This Conservative government has displayed itself to be anti-science. We are losing our top researchers to the United States and other countries where the urgent need for research on climate change is recognized."

The Fraser Institute's Mark Mullins, a critic of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), has been appointed to the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), joining mathematician Christopher Essex, who calls climate change a myth. Another climate change denier, Harper's former chief of staff John Weissenberger (who works for Husky Energy in Alberta) was appointed to the board of the Canada Foundation for Innovation. These two funding agencies are a significant source of research monies for academic work on climate change. "The very fact that these appointees refuse to acknowledge the scientific consensus surrounding climate change calls into question their competency to sit on these funding boards," said Lisa Fox, Environment Critic for the Greens. "Credibility in the scientific community should be an important qualification for deciding which academic studies will be funded."

The Conservative government is becoming known for its record of inserting politics into science. In the spring of 2006, all IPCC material was yanked off of the Environment Canada website and Environment Canada scientists have been muzzled ever since. When the Nobel Prize was awarded to 200 of Canada's top scientists, the Harper government utterly failed to recognize their achievement. Many climate change related programs have been forced to fold due to funding cuts. The future of the Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Research is also in jeopardy, as their funding is not being renewed.

"The Conservative government's latest attack on scientific research in Canada is way over the top. Part of the purpose of having independent granting agencies such as NSERC is to insulate the funding of science from political interference. We are missing opportunities, losing scientists, and losing the respect of researchers worldwide,” said Ms. May.

False Global Warming Argument

I just ran across this while talking to my science students. So I thought I'd summarize the issue: Over the Earth's history there is an incredible correlation between atmospheric CO2 levels and average temperature. When you look at the curves closely though you observe that CO2 levels go up a few hundred years AFTER the temperatures start rising. Doesn't this show that it is NOT CO2 that causes global warming? (this is the argument of the anti-global warming lobby). The answer is no, and here is why:
In the past change came about because the Earth's orbit changes. When the orbit was favourable to warm climate the ocean's temperatures started going up. Warm water cannot hold as much CO2 (and our oceans are the largest CO2 storage). So after a few hundred years CO2 levels start rising. At this point a feedback develops (more CO2 -> warmer temps). So CO2 still led to warmer temperatures but the initial kick came from the Earth's particular orbit.

Our situation today is unique because the temperature increase is initiated by an increase in CO2 in the first place (our orbit is NOT in a configuration favouring warmer temperatures - so you can't explain warming in this way). Now as temperatures rise the oceans will start releasing CO2 in addition to what we are already doing.

This is why the argument against CO2 being responsible for global warming does not hold. It is a tricky one and one that many people unfortunately don't know the whole picture about.

Governing Canada

Today I'm angry ashamed and disgusted. What is going on in Ottawa is an absolute disgrace on all sides. Here's my view point by point:
- I don't believe there is this huge urgency to bail out various companies as the "coalition" suggests... heck not even the Americans have bailed out the auto sector yet. So I'm with Harper on this one.
- BUT. Then why did he propose to scrap striking rights, and end public funding for political parties (the idea of which is to reduce big business influence on politics) in his economic update? Harper obviously figured nobody was going to have the guts to challenge him so he was going rule like he has a majority and ruin the other parties financially while he was at it. Shameful and unnecessary.
- It is NOT undemocratic for a coalition to take over the government if they feel they have more in common that what separates them.
- What IS undemocratic is for Harper to shut down parliament at this critial time. How can he justify this other than to say he wants to save his own skin - and NOTHING gets done in the meantime for Canada at this critical time. It is a dictatorial move - and not the first one by Harper.
- Why the heck Dion thought he could lead this coalition is beyond me. He is the weak link and nobody wants to see this guy as prime minister. I cannot understand how the Liberals (and NDP) let this escalate with such a weak leader. These past few days they should have sat down with the Conservatives to come up with a plan they can support. I believe the Conservatives where humbled enough to actually cave in on the major issues.
- It is too bad Quebec has once again been demonized. Harper hinged his whole rejection of letting his government fall to the coalition on the Bloc's support in a measly three votes over the next 18 months. The Bloc has supported the Conservatives on numerous occations in the past and nothing was wrong with it then. We are once again playing politics with Canadian unity and once again we are throwing wood on the fires of seperatism. That is scary.
- Finally, this episode has once again thrown light onto this weird situation we have with a head of state who is expected to not act as such (making the PM the defacto head of state). The right decision for her would have been to refuse to shut down parliament (because there is NO reason to do so except to save the Conservative government). But she can't make that call because it would be an outrage if an appointed and perceived as ceremonial head of state overruled the PM.

I just truly hope it is not Canada itself that has become the stake in this high power game. I love this country and I am angry to see how our politicians are dragging it through the dirt without regard for how seriously the consequences might be (economic and political).