Tag: Patrick Michaels

Categories
Denial United States of America

November 16, 1995 – another skirmish in the IPCC war

Twenty eight years ago, on this day, November 16, 1995, a denialist douche-bag testilies…

On November 16, 1995, Patrick J. Michaels, an associate professor in the department of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia, testified before the Subcommittee on Energy and the Environment, U.S. House of Representatives, on issues related to human-induced (or anthropogenic) climate change.

Gelbspan, R. (1998) Page 202

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 361ppm. As of 2023 it is 419ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that Michaels and a small band of others had for reasons of their own and (in Michaels case, money and attention), decided to attack and smear climate science and climate scientists. And in 1995 the big effort was to attack the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to anyone who would listen. And they had enough Republican friends, especially in the House of Reps and Senate, to be able to do what the proper scientists were doing, which was create venues for discourse. 

What I think we can learn from this is that “ideal speech communities” can get hijacked and perverted by lying liars. The lying liars could never admit that they were wrong. Too demanding, emotionally.

What happened next

The attacks on the IPCC and in this case, especially Ben Santer continued, but they reached such a high vicious pitch that members of the Global Climate Coalition started to worry about their reputations and started to leave. But it didn’t matter. The denialists had won.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

Categories
Denial IPCC Science

November 21, 1994 – Skeptic invited to engage with IPCC (Spoiler, he doesn’t)

On this day, November 21, an invitation to climate “skeptic” Pat Michaels to take part in the IPCC’s second assessment report was sent by a lead author, Tom Wigley.

“Patrick Michaels was invited to contribute to Chapter 8. He declined to do so. One of the lead authors of Chapter 8, Tom Wigley, wrote to Pat Michaels on November 21, 1994, and on February 21, 1995, soliciting comments on the portrayal of Michaels’s Franklin Institute paper in a December 8, 1994 version of Chapter 8. Prof. Michaels did not respond to these requests.”

Gelbspan, R. (1998)   Page 235 [Compare to Saudis not attending ad hoc group that Houghton organised at end of 1995 in Madrid!!  Easiest way is to not turn up, then continue sniping!!]

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 359ppm. At time of writing it was 417ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – 

The first IPCC assessment report, in 1990, had come under attack by the usual suspects of oil industry lobbyists and various goons (see here).  The climate denial machine geared up, knowing that they would need to get ahead of the game for the second assessment report, to weaken and discredit in advance.

Why this matters. 

We need to remember that the scientists did provide the information. The politicians chose to ignore it. The social movements were not good enough – they were outgunned and outspent. The propaganda blitzes, and the institutional biases away from truth and sanity were too strong.

What happened next?

Michaels declined Wigley’s offer.

The second assessment report came out, and sure enough, the denialist machine launched as ferocious attack on it as it could manage.

Categories
Australia

May 27, 1996 – Not just a river in Egypt – denial in #Australia, organised, ramifying…

On this day, May 1996, a climate denialist professor gave a speech to fellow climate denialists in Australia.

Climate denial outfits like the IPA and Tasman Institute had been inviting various (US) climate denialists to Australia for speaking tours (this was a repertoire that would continue).  They’d started in the early 1990s and, of course, kept going.

“On 27 May 1996, Prof Patrick Michaels delivered a lively and entertaining presentation, outlining empirical difficulties with the Enhanced Greenhouse Global Warming Hypothesis. Through Tasman, Prof. Michaels also published an article on greenhouse issues in the Australian Financial Review of 30 May 1996. The article was subsequently cited by Deputy Prime Minister Tim Fisher”.

Tasman Institute 1996 Annual Review

Why this matters. 

You can see in that quote the sequence – get someone over on a speaking tour. Lean on your mates in the media (with whom you are in a symbiotic relationship anyway) to get an opinion piece in a prestigious newspaper.  THEN get one of your parliamentary goons (in this case Deputy Prime Minister – how cool is that?) to mention it in parliament.

All the way along, you’re creating more “credibility” and heft for your views, which are aimed at creating doubt, delay, uncertainty, so your friends can keep raking in the big bucks.

What happened next?

The denial campaigns continued.  Australia extorted an extremely sweet deal at the Kyoto COP in December 1997, and still didn’t ratify it.

And the carbon dioxide? Oh, it accumulated…

Categories
IPCC

Feb 21, 1995 – an invitation to engage in the IPCC is declined, again…

On this day, February 21 1995, eminent climate scientist Tom Wigley tried (for the second time) to get Pat Michaels, climate “contrarian,” to engage in the IPCC review process for the second assessment report.

… Patrick Michaels was invited to contribute to Chapter 8. He declined to do so. One of the lead authors of Chapter 8, Tom Wigley, wrote to Pat Michaels on November 21, 1994, and on February 21, 1995, soliciting comments on the portrayal of Michaels’s Franklin Institute paper in a December 8, 1994 version of Chapter 8. Prof. Michaels did not respond to these requests. Gelbspan, R. (1998) Page 235

Michaels who’s still alive, so I have to be careful about what I say, declined.

There was no margin in it for him. It’s easier to be lobbing bricks from the outside, and not having to actually engage with the reality of what’s being said, rather than a straw man you’ve created. 

Wigley had been working on climate change for decades, is he still alive and kicking. A few years earlier he had led on a day-long briefing of Margaret Thatcher’s cabinet, which I may cover in April…

What happened next

The second Assessment Report of the IPCC got viciously attacked because it said that there was a discernible influence of human activity. Ultimately, the ferocity of the attacks made it impossible for some corporate members of the Global Climate Coalition to stay on board. And you see this, the attack dogs don’t realise that by barking and snarling as loud as they are ultimately making it difficult for their owners to keep feeding them