How you can watch the deniers
It’s impossible to cover the entire Australian media and blogosphere on climate change issues. Of course I’ve set up news feeds, Google Reader etc.
But I can’t do it alone: keeping on eye on the tactics used by the denial movement in Australia is something anyone can do.
So, if you see a news story, blog entry or hear something on the radio or television bring it to the attention of Watching the Deniers.
Post your links or comments here.
Alternatively email me at: watchthedeniers@optusnet.com.au
How you can help this blog
I don’t need money, donations or funding. Watching the Deniers is my personal contribution to the debate. Research, writing and publication is done in my spare time.
There are a few things you can do to help:
- Alert me to spelling and grammatical errors
- If I misunderstand/misinterpret the science (real science, not denialist propaganda) let me know
- If you think this blog is entertaining and informative, please forward it to family and friends
Thanks!
Being from Colorado don’t figure I can help you much, but a little networking is cool. Also, I look forward to your emails so I can keep a closer eye on this site.
I disagree CC
So much of the denial literature comes from the US, so having a heads up on what new memes they are producing helps counter *before* they hit us Down Under.
99% of the of the material our deniers produce is repackaged material from WUWT and the think tanks. The network effect works both ways
[...] How you can help [...]
http://www.quadrant.org.au/magazine/issue/2010/7-8/the-great-renewable-energy-rort
I just love the “There was a huge public outcry during the ETS debate which motivated the Opposition to act and block the government’s proposed legislation ” part.
I’m no expert on the technicalities of power generation and grid management but it sounds a bit iffy to me. The writer is from something called Landscape Guardians which seems to be an anti windfarm group.
She doesn’t seem to have any interest in better wind generators or novel grid management or storage systems, and she’s not an engineer apparently, but she is an expert on the health problems created by turbines.
expert on health problems created by turbines?
My ex worked for a wind turbine company and I so I got a vague idea about the industry. When she has to present to rural communities it was amazing how many insane health fears that came up.
From cancer to killing raptor birds…
I remember once hearing about the smear campaign against margarine (sorry about the pun) by dairy – which to this day still affects the consumer. It’s amazing how far propaganda can go (another example would be the carrots-night vision lie that was made in WWII to cover-up the use of RADAR).
That she is an expert of health problems associated with turbines makes me instantly sceptical of her. Obviously, she never read the Edison sign that electricity is safe.
I’ve got some literature on this which conclusively shows wind turbines do not cause health issues, indeed I’ve got a draft post on it. May have to polish and publish it…
I don’t doubt you Mike. I know damn well that turbines are safe and a hell of a lot quieter than power-stations.
Oh if her expertise on health is anything like her expertise displayed on other topics in the few paragraphs I bothered with, she’s just another among the many who latch onto anything that’ll fit with her preconceptions.
I tried reading it also, but grew bored and irritate and scrolled down the bottom to write a comment… No comment box! No surprise.
Just wanted to say that I think it’s great what you’re doing with this website. I live in California and I intend to share this blog with as many people as I can.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/bias-at-the-netional-broadcaster-is-as-easy-as-abc/story-fn59niix-1226009060141
The typo in the URL is copied verbatim, it may be fixed in future.
There is a thorough review of the O’Donnell peice at realclimate. Most notable O’Donnell himself says the paper is not to be seen as a refutation of Steig et al.
followed the comments right through Odonnell was trying to blame eric for for the problems with the Odonnell paper, as a reviewer,
liked this comment from eric
I hope Eric isn’t serious about refusing to review a paper submitted by this crew (#42). I think one of their goals with their sort of public behavior is to scare off legitimate reviewers, which isn’t good for the peer review process.
[Response: True, but of course if it gets around that no one legitimate will review their work, then it won't get taken seriously at all. But that's not my goal. I simply don't want anything to do with these people. In fact, I may not bother with a rebuttal to Journal of Climate, because in a couple years temperatures in West Antarctica will probably have reached such an extreme that none of our 'reconstructions' will matter. In fact that may have already happened -- see e.g. Record warming in the South Pacific and western Antarctica associated with the strong central‐Pacific El Niño in 2009–10. --eric]