Exclusive: UN Conference Shuts Up Reporter; Calls Global Warming Science Questions 'Silly'

CNSNEWS.com ^ | 12/16/04 | Marc Morano

[kattracks]

Buenos Aires, Argentina (CNSNews.com) - The moderator of a panel discussion at the United Nations climate change conference here shut down questioning by a reporter who asked about disputed scientific claims regarding global warming, calling such questions "silly."

The panel discussion featured representatives of the Inuit people, who were announcing their intention to seek a ruling from the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights against the United States "for causing global warming and its devastating impacts."

But when asked by CNSNews.com to defend the science behind the group's legal challenge, the moderator of the event cut off the reporter's questions and threatened "to put a stop to this."

CNSNews.com had asked the panelists about the scientific certainty that any potential warming in the Arctic is the fault of humans and specifically the fault of the United States.

The questions were predicated on temperature charts from a recently released report on Arctic warming

and other data showing that surface temperatures in the Arctic in the early half of the 20th century were similar to present-day temperatures.

CNSNews.com asked Inuit panelists if these warmer Arctic temperatures in the first part of the 20th century had any disastrous impacts on the Arctic people.

"No it wasn't, [a disaster] no it wasn't at all," said Sheila Watt-Cloutier, the chairwoman of the Inuit Circumpolar Conference, a United Nations-recognized, quasi-governmental group that is seeking a human rights declaration against the U.S.

Watt-Cloutier said the weather did not impact the Inuit people in any way in the 1930s, and she disputed the notion that today's Arctic weather is similar to that of the 1930s -- even though the data shows that surface temperatures back then were similar to today's Arctic temperatures.

Also asked by CNSNews.com how any potential melt of Greenland's ice shelf could create devastating climate and sea-level consequences when, according to multiple sources of available climate data, Greenland was warmer and had less ice during the Middle Ages than it currently has.

Watt-Cloutier responded, "I am not a scientist, so I can't give you any scientific responses to your question." But earlier in her presentation, Watt-Cloutier did present scientific analysis to bolster her group's legal complaint against the U.S.

"Melting of glaciers and the Greenland ice sheet can cause catastrophic interference with major ocean currents. Even moderate global warming scenarios are already having devastating impacts on the Inuit in the Arctic," Watt-Cloutier claimed earlier.

Panelist Paul Crowley, legal council for the Inuit Circumpolar Conference, said the Arctic region has not seen anything like the current and projected warming trends for "thousands of years."

Donald Goldberg, the moderator, added, "The conclusions of the ACIA (Arctic Climate Impact Assessment) are very clear; they attribute this to greenhouse gas emission resulting in global warming."

Goldberg is the senior attorney for the Center for International Environmental Law, the group that is helping the Inuit people file their complaint against the U.S.

CNSNews.com asked again whether the panelists would acknowledge scientific reports that Greenland was warmer during the Middle Ages and had less ice cover than it has currently.

But Goldberg interrupted, saying, "This is not a scientific event...as the moderator, I am going to put a stop to this.

"I have already put an end to this discussion, it is silly and it has nothing to do with what we are here to talk about," he added.

Goldberg then called for more "productive" questions.

A woman later took to the microphone and declared that the Inuit people's complaint against the U.S. was "not about the science, but it's about what is happening to human beings, and I think the U.S. has to start taking off its blinders."

Jennifer Morgan of the environmental group WWF told the panel, "The fact that you are getting the types of questions that you are getting shows how powerful this [effort to file charges against the U.S.] is."
"This will make government and businesses stand up and take notice," Morgan said.

After the panel discussion, several audience members angrily approached this reporter and accused him of acting "disrespectful" to the Inuit people.

Comments 'not helpful'

Before the question-and-answer session, several of the panelists singled out global warming skeptics and made derisive comments.

During her original presentation, Watt-Cloutier held up a CNSNews.com article

on Arctic melting that was published earlier this week. She ridiculed a passage quoting Myron Ebell of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a free market environmental group. Watt-Cloutier was incensed by Ebell's comment that potentially rising temperatures in the Arctic region may have some benefits.

"If global warming in the Arctic is such a problem, why do 80 percent of Canadians live within 50 miles of the U.S. border?" Ebell asked rhetorically earlier this week. "If Canada warmed up a bit they might be able to live in more of their own country," Ebell, who is attending the UN conference, told CNSNews.com.

Watt-Cloutier told the crowd at the panel discussion, "Comments like this are not helpful to the situation because it invisibilizes (sic) so many of us who live in the Arctic and sub-Arctic. So it may be a little funny to me, but it's still not helpful in invisibilizing the situation for us."

Following the event, Ebell responded to Watt-Cloutier's comments. "She was correct in saying my statement sounded flippant," Ebell conceded. But Ebell did not back down from his critique of Watt-Cloutier's efforts, disputing her group's linking of science and climate "models."

"Models are not scientific evidence; there is no way to prove a model. If something is a scientific fact, it means you can test it to find out whether it's true or false. There is no way to test these models -- to check if there a predicted effect will happen in the future," Ebell said.

"That isn't scientific evidence -- that is just making things up" he added.

Watt-Cloutier and Goldberg also singled out the George Marshall Institute, a science policy group, for opposing their climate complaint against the U.S.

Goldberg called the Marshall Institute "a pretty radical opponent of the work that we are trying to do here."

"But if anything indicates a little progress here, it's how desperate these people are becoming because they see that they really are losing the scientific argument, that they can't sustain the position that they have been taking," Goldberg said.

William O'Keefe of the Marshall Institute denied he was acting desperate and once again refuted the climate conclusions that the Inuit group are using as the basis for its complaint against the U.S. (The George Marshall Institute recently released a study taking a skeptical view of alarmist global warming.)

"Between 1900 and 1940, the amount of temperature increase in the Arctic was about the same as the increase in temperature from the mid-70s until today," O'Keefe said.

"[The Inuit people] are being led to believe that it is human activity that is causing any problems they may be having, but there is no basis for that conclusion," he added.

See Related Articles:
Bush Blamed for 'Devastating Consequences of Global Warming' (Dec. 15, 2004)
Global Warming Melts Dreams of a White Christmas, Study Alleges (Dec. 15, 2004)
Study Claiming Rapid Arctic Ice Melt Refuted at Climate Summit (Dec. 14, 2004)
'Ignore Global Warming,' Says Former Greenpeace Member (Dec. 14, 2004)
UN Climate Conference Called 'Meeting About Nothing' (Dec. 13, 2004)
Study Claiming 'Scientific Consensus' for Global Warming is Ridiculed (Dec. 13, 2004)
Meteorologist Likens Fear of Global Warming to 'Religious Belief' (Dec. 2, 2004)

E-mail a news tip to Marc Morano.

Send a Letter to the Editor about this article.

[cvq3842]

I'm speechless.

Actually, I'm not. This is all too predictable.

Thanks for posting.

[Semper Paratus]

This will be common when World Government comes.

[jpl]

Watt-Cloutier responded, "I am not a scientist, so I can't give you any scientific responses to your question."

Goldberg interrupted, saying, "This is not a scientific event...as the moderator, I am going to put a stop to this."

In other words, man-made "climate change" has absolutely nothing to do with science and everything to do with politics.

[reformedliberal]

Do we know what powers for redress this Commission has? I will bet none and further, that this is solely political and designed to drum up even more press hysteria against the USA and for Kyoto.

[worldclass]

But Goldberg interrupted, saying, "This is not a scientific event...as the moderator, I am going to put a stop to this.

"I have already put an end to this discussion, it is silly and it has nothing to do with what we are here to talk about," he added.

Goldberg then called for more "productive" questions.

A woman later took to the microphone and declared that the Inuit people's complaint against the U.S. was "not about the science, but it's about what is happening to human beings, and I think the U.S. has to start taking off its blinders."


Yep, Global warming has nothing to do with science or reality. Just another illusionary sledgehammer to stuff socialism and tribal rights laws down our throats.

[wvobiwan]

Damn the facts - if there's money to be extorted from the US Taxpayer - FULL SPEED AHEAD!!

So funny, they make charges based upon so-called scienctific evidence, and then not only say it's not a scientific conference, but that they're not scientists.

So where exactly ARE the scientists that supposedly back up this Global Warming scam? Has anyone actually met one or heard them defend their evidence?

[Constitutionalist Conservative]

Rush was talking about this a few minutes ago. Dunno if he was just trying to be funny, but he kept referring to the panelists as "Intuits". :-)

[John O]

If only we could invent a neutron bomb that only killed liberals we could solve the world's problems in a few days

[Adder]

"Just shut up and believe us, dammit"

I thought I read that in the article....No?

Oh.

My bad.

[DTogo]

I did something similar once at a renewable energy conference. I asked a presenter why consumers had to pay more for renewables if they didn't cost the utility company much more (if any) than other forms of energy, and this was "double-dipping." He expressed shock and dismay at my questions, but later apologized. Several in the audience also came up to me later and said they agreed with me.

It's never about science or economics, it's about an agenda or lining one's pockets. In this case, it's about a free trip to Buenos Aires to bash the USA.

[26lemoncharlie]

Time to start defending ourselves and vaporizing a few of these idiot countries until we have enough parking!

[shibumi]

"Don't confuse me with the facts. my mind is made up!"

(How dare we question the scientific acumen of a people who, throughout the 500+ years of EuroAmerican history haven't figured out that there's a warmer place to live than inside the Arctic Circle???....of course, I live near Chicago and at this time of year, I question my own intelligence on a daily basis!)

[shubi]

They aren't scientists, but they play one on TV. LOL

[McGavin999]

There are now more greenhouse gases emmitted by China than there is in the US. Why aren't they suing China?

[knick knack]

Watt-Cloutier responded, "I am not a scientist, so I can't give you any scientific responses to your question."
Goldberg interrupted, saying, "This is not a scientific event...as the moderator, I am going to put a stop to this."


AND YET...
"But if anything indicates a little progress here, it's how desperate these people are becoming because they see that they REALLY ARE LOSING THE SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENT, that they can't sustain the position that they have been taking," Goldberg said.

So, let me get this strait... "We are making our claims based on scientific studies and models but we can't answer a question about our science because it is not a conference about science. Oh, and by the way, you are losing the scientific argument."
Well, what is it....Science or Not Science???


Ditto jpl. "In other words, man-made "climate change" has absolutely nothing to do with science and everything to do with politics."

[woodb01]

bump for later tonight

See the ANTI-DNC Web Portal at --->
http://www.noDNC.com

[nothingnew]

This whole article has left me invisibilized. It's almost as bad as having my beeber stuned. Not quite, but almostizized!

FMCDH(BITS)

[The Electrician]

This group is misplacing the blame for their predicament. Clearly the Inuit people are being punished by the great whale goddess for their cruel history of killing whales. It's about time that the Inuit were held responsible for their crimes against nature, isn't it.

[Unam Sanctam]

Why are these people so insecure that they have to try to silence anyone who raises scientific questioning? Sure doesn't sound like an objective scientific inquiry to me.