Posted on 07/11/2007 8:54:16 PM PDT by JohnA
The ABC's screening and treatment of The Great Global Warming Swindle documentary would be funny if it wasn’t so serious.
Since when has ANY documentary on the ABC received such an extensive promotion and thoroughgoing coverage? A special Tony Jones interview – recorded in London; a live studio panel discussion; endless advertising; news radio etc etc. Advertisement
All this would be funny except that the effect of Swindle is serious. Deadly so. The aim of the program and its lackeys is to create doubt, any doubt, about climate change.
Because even a little amount of doubt helps persuade the public and politicians that the really substantial action needed to address climate change should be put off until we are more certain about the science.
This is the strategy so helpfully exposed in 2003 through a famous memo from US communications guru and advisor to US Republicans, Frank Luntz, who wrote:
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 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...
"Doubt is our product," stated the legendary tobacco industry memo from 1969. So it is again today with the climate skeptic industry. And it is an industry – an industry funded clique of self promoters.
Those interviewed in Swindle are portrayed as "leading climate scientists" when in fact they are far from it. They are part of the skeptic network working with organisations funded by the fossil fuel industry.
This best way to demonstrate this is to use the superb Exxon Secrets website. Here you can put in an individual’s name and see which think tanks they are connected to and which of those receive funding from Exxon.
Incredibly eight people who appear in Swindle are connected to 26 separate think tanks, policy centers and organisations that receive funding from Exxon. You can see in this map (to access it, click launch and then skip intro) the people who appear in Swindle and the grey lines show which organisations they are connected to. Those institutions with the dollar signs are those that have received money from Exxon.
Click for a larger image
Unfortunately the right wing climate change deniers within the ABC and the nation’s opinion pages have successfully convinced some that the debate about Swindle is a debate about free speech and the suppression of dissent and ideas. But the real issues not being discussed are the links of those in this film to the fossil fuel industry. To talk of such things is to risk being labelled "extreme" and a "conspiracy theorist".
But perhaps the best guide is film maker Martin Durkin's previous film efforts. In 1999, Channel 4 in the UK broadcast in its Equinox series (which claimed to be a series of science documentaries) a film produced by Durkin called “Storm in a D Cup”, which argued that silicone breast implants were beneficial to a woman’s health.
The Swindle documentary does contain a great story. But it is a story that hasn’t yet been told.
Send your tips to boss@crikey.com.au or submit them anonymously here.
Question authority. Especially Socialist authority.
Doesn’t Exxon fund PBS and NPR? So, according to the author, we should question everything PBS and NPR say?
Global warming was a swindle and the rush to sue over silicone breast implants was a swindle as well...
<< Those interviewed in Swindle are portrayed as “leading climate scientists” when in fact they are far from it. They are part of the skeptic network working with organisations funded by the fossil fuel industry. >>
And let us not forget, it was the natural gas industry (Enron) which grandfathered and funded the global warming theory back in the 90’s.
Anyone care to go over this story and count the logical fallacies employed by the author? I ran out of fingers and toes.
FYI..
ABC = AUSTRALIAN Broadcasting Corporation..
Yuh didn’t think the Drive Bys here would show this, do you?
I agree. He must be moonlighting from his day job of dreaming up conspiracy theories.
Gee, I wonder who the anti funding hero is? Soros, perhaps and no telling who else.
If there was anything in this screed to dispute the factual content of the documentary, I missed it.
Ghastly. An Aussie paper that's just as pompous as the UK Guardian.
Now there is a really interesting comment. It seems believable on it's face but can you back it up with some good sources for the claim?
Because even a little amount of doubt helps persuade the public and politicians that the really substantial action needed to address climate change should be put off until we are more certain about the science.
Ah, yes ... we should do SOMETHING, even if we don't know if we're causing problems at all, and even if we don't know whether anything we can do will have any effect....
There are plenty of good reasons to be worried about burning hydrocarbons in the present huge quantities (pollution and supply being the two biggest). It'd be good to focus on those. And then Mr. Ninny's complaint would take care of itself.
Now there is a really interesting comment. It seems believable on it's face but can you back it up with some good sources for the claim?
The program The Great Global Warming Swindle actually lays blame on the Margaret Thatcher regime in their propaganda against the Coal Miners Union in an attempt to undermine the future worth of coal.
Enron had more to do with starting this junk science crap than Al Gore did. They stood to make billions off it.
no pics yet?!
Envirowhackos use their money to fund bad science that is used to smear the oil industry and scare away people from its product.
The oil companies use their money to fund other scientists to point out the holes in the bad science, but they are the bad guys ?
Check the voting on ExxonMobil shareholders’ meetings environment resolutions and don’t overstate your very weak case.
<< Do a Google on Enron + CO2 and you will find dozens of solid references. >>
Thanks, Ditto. You’re about a day ahead of me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.