Global Warming - can 1500 scientists be wrong?
This is a letter received from Douglas Smith, a PhD living in Carnarvon, Ontario.
It concerns a staffer at Conservative MP Barry Devolin's Lindsay, Ontario constituency office.
Mr. Smith was concerned about the staffer Peter Taylor's somewhat rigorous thoughts about global warming.
The following is verbatim from Mr. Smith, who by way of full disclosure, has run for the Green Party in the past.
Mr. Devolin, for the record, said in an Echo article that Peter Taylor's views do not reflect the views of the party or his own thoughts on Global warming.
What follows is Mr. Smith's verbatim transcript.
On December 18, 2009 around 9:30 AM, I left my phone number with the receptionist at the Conservative Party constitutency office in Lindsay, requesting that Mr. Peter Taylor return my call. Mr. Taylor serves as an office assistant to Barry Devolin, Member of Parliament for the federal riding of Haliburton/Kawartha Lakes/Brock.
Earlier in the day I had learned from a trustworthy source that Mr. Taylor was quite open in voicing some extreme right-wing notions about the politics of climate change. Being curious about the beliefs of Mr. Devolin’s assistant, I recorded his return phonecall, which extended from 11:30 AM till noon-hour.
A complete transcript of our phone exchange follows. A copy can be made available for verification purposes.
Even a quick scan of this transcript raises serious questions about the mental tenor of at least one employee at Mr. Devolin’s constituency office. Exactly why has Mr. Devolin hired a fanatic to talk offensive balderdash to his constituents? If this is not as Mr. Devolin would like it, then surely some vigorous consciousness-raising is in order.
PT My name is Peter from Barry Devolin’s office. Would Doug Smith be there, please?
DS Doug Smith is speaking.
PT How can I help you, sir? You called and left a message for me?
DS I did. I’m a constituent, a somewhat concerned constituent, speaking from the Carnarvon area…It would seem from the national press that a good deal of shame has been brought upon Canada because of our attitude or response to the climate crisis.
PT Which climate crisis?
DS The climate crisis that’s occuring on this planet.
PT What is the crisis?
DS Well, I’m sure you’re aware of the details of it…The crisis has to do with the fact that the earth is warming due to anthropogenic sources.
PT Says who?
DS Says the majority of the world’s scientists.
PT They just did a report that said they were lying to each other, that international group, and they have just been doing cover-up, it hasn’t been proven at all…Six hundred years ago they were growing wheat on Greenland and there were no SUVs back then. So global warming has nothing to do with man…Climate change is better true, and nothing that humans could ever do would ever change the climate. Now, if we’re talking about pollution, I would agree with you, we should do our best to not pollute the environment.
DS So it’s your attitude that additions of CO2 to the air don’t affect climate?
PT Actually it’s needed by plants. Plants take in carbon dioxide, sir, and they convert it into – they use it in the photosynthesis process. Why would you want to decrease the carbon dioxide in the environment?
DS Because if you took the case of oxygen, for instance, if you increased oxygen, your lungs would burn up. Obviously there are optimum levels…
PT The oxygen levels were higher a few thousand years ago.
DS What I am saying is, if you continue to increase them, eventually your lungs will ignite.
PT You’re talking about oxygen, sir. Are you saying we should cut down trees? That’s ridiculous too.
DS Well, we do cut down trees, don’t we?
PT But sir, climate control has nothing to do with what’s happening in Copenhagen. Copenhagen is just a transfer of funds from rich nations to poor nations. And who makes the money but Al Gore by selling cap-and-trade tax credits. Because if you went on your assumption, what caused the global warming when the Vikings were growing crops on Greenland? If you can answer me that question, then I’d say, yes sir, we could do something. And when the Vikings did something to Greenland. And it’s obviously not true. There’s been periods of heating and cooling across the world over the last thousands of years.
DS Are you prepared to accept that the rapid heating of the earth…
PT There’s no “rapid.” It’s not proven. It’s flawed science.
DS Who are you listening to?
PT Who are you listening to?
DS I’m listening to the twelve hundred scientists who represent the International Panel on Climate Change.
PT There’s not twelve hundred scientists. If you investigate it, there’s just a few of them. They’re all politically driven. Any scientists that do have a true message are shut down by liberal-leaning universities that they work for. Anyway, I’m saying it’s hogwash, and there’s lots of articles out there, sir…And there Senate reports. Senator Imhofe of the U.S. Congress has come out and said it’s a plot. Al Gore’s movie, “The Inconsistent Truth”, whatever it is, the flawed hockey-stick argument, it’s shown to be bogus.
DS Isn’t that Senator employed by the oil-and-gas industry?
PT He’s done a whole report on climate change, showing how bogus it all is.
DS A lot of people say he’s the biggest…
PT They’re the ones on the other side of the issue. They want your tax money to give to the Third World countries, supposedly. Do you want to be controlled by the UN, or do you want a sovereign nation of Canada deciding our own future?
DS I understand these are your points of view, but what does Mr. Devolin feel about it?
PT I don’t know what Mr. Devolin feels.
DS Has he ever expressed himself on this subject?
PT I can get him to write you a letter, but that’s the truth, sir.
DS Are you his parliamentary representative?
PT No, I’m just an assistant in the office, who’s well informed on the issues.
DS Well, you don’t seem to be well informed, but you certainly have some strong attitudes.
PT Well, sir, I’m not informed on left issues, but I do know what their arguments are.
DS It doesn’t have to do much with the left. It has to do with whether we are going to survive here on this planet, or not.
PT Do you think that by making a few changes and giving more money to the UN is going to solve it?
DS I don’t think a few changes are called for. I think rather radical changes are called for.
PT What are the radical changes you’re asking for, sir?
DS We are going to have to decrease our use of a lot of internal combustion engines rather quickly.
PT China’s not going to do it, and India’s not going to do it. They are developing nations right now. And Africa’s not going to do it. Canada is insignificant in terms of 35 million people compared to 5 billion on the earth.
DS Doesn’t it concern you that Canada produces more greenhouse gas percapita than any other nation in the world?
PT That is a bogus statistic, sir.
DS Does your Prime Minister represent the oil-and-gas industry, or does he represent the people of Canada?
PT He represents the sovereign nation of Canada, sir.
DS To what extent are we sovereign if we have alligned with the United States forces?
Pt We’re not aligning…
DS The Prime Minister just said that he was pleased to announce that Canada has aligned its forces with those of the United States. To what extent do we remain sovereign?
PT Well, I disagree that we have aligned outselves with the United States.
DS Well then, you would have to disagree with the Prime Minister. He just announced it in Copenhagen.
PT There is a lot of politics involved, even for our Prime Minister who is having to posture…Look at the Kyoto Accord. People signed it and did absolutely nothing, because it was a worthless piece of document.
DS Well, Canada actually rescinded its agreement…making Canada a criminal in terms of the world’s eyes.
PT That’s what I’m saying! Criminal to who? To the UN body, who is a bunch of corrupt communist socialists who are trying to take your money.
DS There are no communists left on the face of this earth.
PT What about the South America dictator?
DS He’s not a dictator. He’s an elected representative of his country.
PT It’s a communist country, sir!
DS It’s not a communist country. There’s a large capitalist bloc.
PT He’s a dictator!
DS He’s not a dictator, he’s elected.
PT Pardon me, sir, but you don’t know what a dictatorship is. If you go down and look at these countries…
DS Have you lived there?
PT I have, sir.
DS You’ve lived in Venezuela? Well?
PT Have you?
DS No, but I’ve been in Guyana, and I know what it’s like to live in a country that isn’t socialist. That’s right next door, by the way.
PT They’re taking your money and they want more of your money.
DS Who’s they?
PT The UN!
DS I’m not being taxed by the UN.
PT Hillary Clinton announced that’s she going to raise – who’s paying 100 billion dollars?
DS Well, if it actually even happens. That’s politics too, don’t you think?
PT I think it is. It’s a lot a rhetoric, sir. But who gets the money? It’s the guys like Al Gore, who sell you the tax credits.
DS Al Gore is already a rich man, so why would he want more money?
PT So he can power his house down there in the States. It’s the only house you can see from space, I’ve heard.
DS I betcha that’s not the case, because Bill Gates has a bigger house than he has.
PT Well, Bill Gates earned his money by selling you and me internet connections, and we have a choice. But Bill Gates is different. Do you know the difference between Bill Gates and Al Gore? Al Gore is selling government, more government to you. Bill Gates is selling private enterprise. You can buy or not buy his product. You have a choice.
DS Actually, Bill Gates has tried his hardest over the last decades to enforce a monopoly, so that I can’t buy another product.
PT You can buy Coca-Cola if you choose to or not. You don’t have any choice with taxes…
DS Fortunately the United States intervened and broke up Microsoft, so that I do have a choice. It takes the government to police these characters, don’t you think? That’s why we have anti-trust legislation.
PT I agree. But what we’re talking about at Cohenhagen is not free enterprise, sir. The raping of governments and taking over power by these unelected officials in Copenhagen.
DS I think Harper was elected, and wasn’t he present in Copenhagen?
PT He’s going over to sign the agreement to make everyone feel good and look good because we’re trying to save the planet. And sir, the planet doesn’t need saving.
DS It’s not the planet that needs saving. It will continue to wheel through space for an eternity. It’s probably the life that exists upon it, the thin biofilm…
PT The Vikings, you still haven’t answered my question.
DS The vikings have nothing to do with it.
PT We were covered in ice a few thousand years ago. What caused the warming?
DS Because of the Milankovitch cycles, which are very, very long term…
PT What heated it up, the sun?
DS Yes, the sun.
PT It wasn’t people using hair-spray?
DS You’re babbling. You ask me a question, then you start to babble. If you want the answer you will have to wait a second. There are long-term cycles called Milankovitch cycles, which can be predicted, they are geological in nature, and they have to do with the relationship of the earth to the sun…
PT You used one word I will contest with: predicted. They can’t predict the weather on Friday.
DS I’m not talking about the weather. I’m talking about the climate through thousands of years of geological time, and these effects can be predicted. Likewise, there are short-term blips of heating and warming. That’s natural. Every natural phenomenon has a cycle to it. But what is most, most alarming…
PT It’s all made up.
DS Actually it’s not. They record the cycles through cores in ice and…
PT It’s all baloney science. They’re just making it up. You know, when I went to school these same scientists were saying that we were cooling.
Now they say we’re warming.
DS Don’t you think that science advances, that it deepens its knowledge, and improves its techniques?
PT Read the counter-arguments. There are two arguments…
DS Well, there is data on the one hand, and there are people who make arguments on the other.
PT Well, obviously the Prime Minister doesn’t agree with you.
DS What do you mean to say?
PT He’s duly elected by the people.
DS And what does he think?
PT Well, he doesn’t agree with you.
DS What does he agree with? He already said at Copenhagen that all Canadian’s should be concerned about the climate crisis. Are you differing with the Prime Minister on this matter?
PT I guess I do on this one.
DS Why? Because you don’t have any evidence. You just have prejudices.
PT I don’t have any evidence? Neither do you, sir.
DS You see, I do. But I’m not going to give it to you over a five-minute phone-call. Obviously, it you would like to sit down and pass and swap articles, we could do that. If you have the qualifications to test who actually…
PT You know what would be the real test. Ten years from now, if we haven’t seen the death of the world and we’re not dead.
DS Well, I don’t think that’s very prudent. The idea is to intervene before the cycle becomes impossible to restrain.
PT Intervene how? You can’t control the Indians or the Chinese do, and the other three-and-a-half billion people…
DS We start with ourselves. We are going to have to start with ourselves. You know how? Impose a two dollar tax on gasoline and see what happens. That’s going to change things quite a bit, isn’t it?
PT We’ll become a banana republic…We’ll all be on bicycles. Maybe that’s the way you want it, for all I know.
DS I just want to quote you what the Prime Minister said in Copenhagen. He said, and I’m quoting, “Canadians of all ages and in all regions share a profound interest in contributing to effective global action on climate change.” So I’m asking you, how is the Progressive Conservative government contemplating these things, and what is Mr. Devolin prepared to do with regards to the economy and society in this area, in order to bring about the change that the Prime Minister is asking for.
PT I guess he’ll get that same question in question-period when government resumes in January.
DS I’m wishing that you would pass this question on to Mr. Devolin in the hope that he would have something clear to say.
PT I’m sure that they will have a release, and you’ll read about it soon.
DS Are you at odds with Mr. Devolin on this issue?
PT I have no idea. I’ve never talked to him about it.
DS You haven’t!
PT No, sir!
DS Well, why wouldn’t you? Again I’m quoting the Prime Minister that “it’s a matter of profound interest to Caanadians”.
PT I’m profoundly interested, too.
DS Of course, in the other direction.
PT Exactly.
DS Well, it seems that you’re coming from a position of almost total ignorance…
PT Your point of view.
DS The actual fact is that you have to in the final analysis acknowledge that some people know more than you do, as duly recognized senior scientists in their field. And if there is near-unanimity amongst them, and actually a convergence of opinion…
PT What about the unanimity of the scientist who disagree with you?
DS The scientists who disagree are in…
PT Because you write them off, just like I’m writing you off. It’s a political issue.
DS Now, you don’t really want to write someone off who has a PhD, while you sit there as a staff…
PT …grants…money…
DS I’m not getting paid by anybody.
PT I know you’re not, but all the money in terms of science - they’re getting grants from schools…
DS Why shouldn’t schools give grants to people to do research? How else do you do research?
PT I’m telling you to watch where the money goes and what they study.
DS So if you look at money going into Senator Imhofe’s coffers from the oil-and-gas industry, what do you conclude?
PT That’s baloney.
DS It’s not baloney. He has to publish the data. He has to, as a representative of the United States Senate, publish where his contributions come from, and if he gets $250,000 from the oil-and-gas industry, what conclusions do I draw, based on what you are saying about people who receive grants?
PT So does Obama. He gets money support from the oil-and-gas industry.
DS Of course.
PT That’s not the argument.
DS Well, that is the argument. You say, if you get money from somebody, you follow the money. So I followed the money. Now you say that’s not the argument. What is your argument?
PT The truth is, the climate has always been changing, and nothing we do is going to affect it.
DS Well, we’ve already affected it, so that is actually not the truth. The scientific consensus is that we have affected it anthrogenically through the release of CO2 and other carbon dioxide-like matter into the atmosphere. You can sit there and try to refute that, but you have no solid evidence whatsoever that’s not the case.
PT Toronto is a warmer place now because…
DS What has that got to do with the price of cheese? We are talking about the climate of the earth. Local experience is one way or the other, but if you want to, talk to an old fellow how he used to drive trucks across the lakes loaded down with wood, but they don’t do that no more because there’s not enough ice to carry it off. So talk to the old fellows, and they will talk to you about what is called…
PT Are you going to call industry down and say we’re going to live in tents?
DS We don’t know what we’re going to do, but we have start talking like there’s a problem first of all, and develop a consensus around that, and not let deniers who have very little evidence on their behalf take control of the press and occupy political parties, and begin…
PT You better be careful or they’ll start taking your tax payers and squandering it away on these conferences and giving it away and filling their own pockets.
DS Well, I know where a lot of my money goes, and it goes right to your own representative, who has a very fat salary.
PT Well, that’s true. Government is expensive.
DS No, I’m not talking about governing expenses, I’m talking about keeping our representative in Ottawa in the style to which he is accustomed.
PT Every Liberal and Conservative, they are all paid the same.
DS We can talk about the cost of government, and I know that Stephen Harper has tried to reduce the scale of government, while at the same time allowing large private industries to establish the mandate and direction of policies in Canada. And I think we have to recognize just to what extent the oil-and-gas industry is…
PT It’s making money! If we didn’t have an oil-and-gas industry, Alberta would be in a lot of trouble. They’re the only one paying in. We’re all have-nots. We’re all getting the transfer money from Alberta.
DS We would all have to lead decent lives and stop tearing off the face of this earth. And do you know where that gas and oil is going to go?
PT Where?
DS The United States. That’s why they’re building the pipeline.
PT Why don’t we sell it?
DS We can’t, because of the proportionality clause in the NAFTA. We have to supply the United States as much percentage-wise as when the agreement was signed. We can’t go back on that, otherwise we get invaded.
PT Who told you are running out of gas and oil?
DS Who told me we are running out of gas and oil? Haven’t you heard the news? The International Energy Agency has said we’ll reach peak oil by the year 2020.
PT Well, we’ll have an alternative then.
DS What kind?
PT I don’t know, sir…And the sky was falling, and the chickens were running around, and you know what? The same alarmists today – What are we going to do. You know what? Free enterprise will figure it out. And we will figure out how to drive our economy, sir, without the government intervention. Because when the government gets involved, it’s called communism and socialism.
DS Free enterprise has already created the mess in Alberta, where it’s screwing up an area the size of England to extract oil from the tar sands, leading to a vast pollution problem on the Athabaska…
PT And your problem is? Why?
DS Because my fellow humans are suffering, or going to suffer, as a result of it all.
PT Fellow humans!
DS How would you like to be downstream of that mess? Would you like to live on the Athabaska River?
PT I wouldn’t like to live near the Pickering Power Plant, either, but that’s my choice. That’s the freedom of choice of every Canadian.
DS A lot of folks don’t have freedom of choice, or they prefer to stay where they were born and live with their families and with their neighbours.
PT Well, there you go!
DS Well, I’m not going anywhere. I’m telling you that they’re faced with a wall of pollution coming down on them.
PT I’m glad you’re so concerned about them out there.
DS Because I’m a fellow human being.
PT Well, don’t drive your car.
DS I don’t.
PT You take a bicycle?
DS No. Most of the time I don’t drive my car, is what I’m saying.
PT There you go.
DS 99% of the time I don’t drive my car.
PT Most people have no choice. They’ve got to go to work. They’ve got to keep their lives going, and everyone is doing the best they can to do it.
DS No they’re not. Obviously you’re not doing your best, because you are a denier. You’re offered an argument, which if you had an open mind and somebody supplied you with the scientific details, you could not refute it. You do not have the ability to contest the scientific data, so you listen to a couple of oddballs on the margin, who scoff at science…
PT Now just wait a minute. You’ve insulted me. How do you know how much education I have?
DS Because you sound like you don’t have any. Because you’re quoting oddballs. You’re not proceeding in a rational state. You have a set of prejudices that you’re voicing. You are unable to point to any literature that can support your points of view. You’ve chosen to go with a bunch of kooks and oddballs at the very margin of science, and you take their point of view holus-bolus without looking at the consensus argument.
PT Do you have a PhD?
DS Yes I do.
PT That’s what it sounds like.
DS I’m sorry about that. I wish I could act like an ignoramus. But you know something? Canadians like to draw averages. So there’s somebody who knows something, and there’s somebody who’s ignorant. You know what the difference is, if you draw the average between the two?
PT What?
DS A half-wit. Goodbye.
PT Bye.
