The emperor’s new carbon credits

Hans Christian Andersen would surely have been inspired by the ‘science’ of Copenhagen

by Mark Steyn on Thursday, December 17, 2009 9:00am - 218 Comments

Rajendra PachauriFor a small country, Denmark sure attracts a lot of attention. A Chicago Muslim, David Headley, was recently arrested at O’Hare International Airport en route to Copenhagen to kill the commissioning editor and artists of the Danish Muhammad cartoons. Alas, a far bigger group flying in to Copenhagen for a massive suicide bombing were permitted to board their flights: these were the jet-setting bigwigs of the climate-change circuit en route to Denmark to blow up the global economy and individual liberty in order to get back to paradise and enjoy their reward of 72 virgin-growth forests.

Both the radical Islam of David Headley and the Church of Settled Science of David Suzuki seem almost parodic responses to the hollowness of the modern multicultural West and the search for alternative, globalized identities. Indeed, it is hard to say which is wackier. Take Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the Prince of Wales. One’s a millenarian apocalyptic loon, and the other’s president of Iran. On balance, widening the streets of Tehran for the imminent return of the Twelfth Imam seems marginally less deranged than insisting the planet is doomed in 96 months unless humanity abandons the evils of capitalism and “the age of convenience.” (This from a man who has never drawn his own curtains.)

Ah, well. When I compare the eco-cultists to the humourless fanatics of the jihad, I get barraged by stern emails denouncing me as a “denier.” Apostate! And Mr. Suzuki wants deniers jailed. Call the Inquisition!

Shortly after the leaked documents from Britain’s Climatic Research Unit hit the Internet, there appeared in the European press the news that Danish prostitutes had sportingly offered their services for free to the warm-mongers at the Copenhagen conference. I resisted comment for a week—in part because, while a generous gift, it seemed unlikely to be taken up. For one thing, it’s far harder to “hide the decline” when you’re in a Danish bordello than at the Climatic Research Unit. For another, you have to pay extra if you want a second girl to come in and “peer-review” your submission.

Alas, when Andrew Revkin, the Senior Climate Alarmist of the New York Times, made one brief, bland, passing mention of the free-sex offer, eschewing the leaden Steyn jests above, professor Michael Schlesinger of the University of Illinois fired off an email angrily denouncing his “gutter reportage” and threatening this most co-operative of eco-stooges with “the Big Cutoff” from “those of us who believe we can no longer trust you.” I assume the “Big Cutoff” alludes to access and not anything likely to spoil one’s evening at an environmentally aware whorehouse. Incidentally, in his intemperate missive, professor Schlesinger used the phrase “climate prostitutes,” and it took me a while to figure out that was a reference to the Danish hookers rather than the scientists. Still, given the recent publicity about the Settled Science Syndicate’s bullying of dissenters, this hardly seems the time to threaten a chap with excommunication not for questioning the “science” but for making a joke. Actually, not even a joke, but merely a lighthearted acknowledgement. “There are no jokes in Islam,” declared the Ayatollah Khomeini. And that goes double for us, says professor Schlesinger.

Nor are we allowed to make jokes about Rajendra Pachauri. I always love those experts who go on TV and say you can’t pronounce on this subject unless you’re a bona fide climatologist. Dr. Pachauri, the head honcho of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, is a graduate of the Indian Railways Institute of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering. He’s not a climatologist but a railroad engineer. So, if he ever avails himself of a free half-hour with a Copenhagen hooker, I’m sure, like the Bombay to Cochin express, he’ll pull out on time. But it’s hard to see why he should be presiding over a multi-trillion-dollar shakedown of the global economy. For one thing, Dr. Pachauri has one of the largest carbon footprints on the planet. He’s in favour of “hefty aviation taxes” to “deter people from flying,” but fortunately once you’re part of the transnational jet set nothing can deter you. He flew 443,243 miles on “IPCC business” in the year-and-a-half run-up to Copenhagen. I’m not sure whether that includes his two weekend round trips from New York to Delhi, once for a cricket practice, once for a match.

Needless to say, opening the Carbonhagen shakindownen inaugural session, he dismissed the “Climategate” revelations as a “theft.” Not so. They were a leak by a concerned insider—the sort of chap we usually hail as a “whistle-blower.” In this case, he can blow the whistle as loud as he likes but, like a deaf Central Railways conductor waiting to pull out for Wadala Road from the Victoria Terminus, Dr. Pachauri can’t hear him. All the science has been “peer-reviewed,” he says, so what could possibly go wrong?

I wrote a couple of weeks back about the corruption of “peer review” revealed by the CRU leaks. But, once it’s got the peer-reviewed label, it’s hard to dislodge. The famous hockey stick graph created by Dr. Michael Mann played a critical role in persuading millions of people we’re all gonna fry. In the National Post of April 2, 2001, after the UN had adopted this graph as the official proof of global warming, I pointed out that the first nine centuries of the millennium were measured by using tree-ring cycles, and the modern era was represented by temperatures. Now I’m not a climatologist. I’m not even a railroad engineer. But, if you show me a graph that looks like a long bungalow with the Empire State Building tacked on the end, I’ll go, “Whoa! That looks pretty serious. We better head for the hills.” If it then emerges in the fine print that the bungalow was created with one unit of measurement and the skyscraper another, I’ll postpone my departure and go, “Er, hang on, what’s the deal with that? If we’ve got tree rings for the first nine centuries, why can’t we stick with the tree rings through the 20th?”

Bookmark and Share
  • help

    There is way too much doubt regarding climate change. It seems unlikely that it has much to do human activity, judging by the efforts made to hide the facts by the "scientific community". And there is certainly very little basis on which to destroy economies to address the issue. Steyn is correct that it is primarily a political effort to transfer power from local to international jurisdiction and drain dollars from private pockets. How do I get out of this nightmare? Mr. Harper, are you listening?

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/balabu balabu

      He is listening but being in minority he has to placate the ecofreek liberals , NDP ers and separatists.

    • Jordan

      Yes, "doubt" in science is common. There is "doubt" on theories of gravity. That doesn't make the facts not true, though.

  • Esteban

    When did the world appoint the Missing Link to run the world's climate show at the IPCC? Of course the world would seem warm to him – since they just finished chipping him out of that block of ice.

    None of this would even be on the table if not for the crooks and self-loathing liberals of the western democracies. Stop the madness. Tell the unproductive jerk-offs of the world to take their demand for environmental reparations and shove it.

  • Mulder

    The truth is out there, but certainly not in Copenhagen. Unfortunately we live in a world where anyone with Microsoft Word and a piece of parchment paper can be a self-proclaimed climatologist, even a railroad engineer like Pachauri. Remember, every time you buy one of those fluorescent light bulbs, you made Al Gore richer. Gore and P.T.Barnum have the same mission statement, "There's a sucker born every minute." Rock on Steyn.

  • Steyn Sucks

    "Steyn is correct that it is primarily a political effort to transfer power from local to international jurisdiction and drain dollars from private pockets."

    Did he actually say that? I stopped reading the article 14 words in when he went off on his anti-Muslim jag, it's too bad he is squandering his soapbox on his insane and illogical obsession with all things Muslim. If he did say that, well, big deal, it hardly takes a Coco Chanel to say that the emperor has no clothes.

    "How do I get out of this nightmare? Mr. Harper, are you listening? "

    Let's answer that question with a question: why are virtually all of the AGW skeptics men? And should a gender so easily swayed by AGW hype be allowed to vote? You can have universal suffrage, or you can have a government which doesn't buy into AGW nonsense, but you cannot have both. Liberal democracy inevitably leads to this sort of thing and its idiots like Steyn who glorify the failure that is liberal democracy who ironically are responsible for this mess.

    • help

      Who cares what gender skeptics are? And, how do you know that most skeptics are men? The rest of your paragraph is gibberish – climate change skepticism and universal sufferage are not remotely linked. It requires only a modicum of independent thought.

      • virgil

        you are a dhimmi and you are not worthy of passing a comment on mark steyn.

  • Berlin

    In the late 1940's ,early 1950's whenever it was too hot,too cold, too anything my father would say " those damn A-bomb tests".

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/exhon2009 exhon2009

    With all the caricatures of the name Copenhagen I can't believe Steyn missed the obvious one related to his article on the prostitutes:
    Pokinhagen!

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/DanielShays DanielShays

    Hilarious column.Accurate too.There is somehow something extra amusing about African Presidents for Life and Drug Running South American dictators invoking phony data to justify the additional contributions of Western taxpayers to their Swiss Bank accounts.

  • andrewwood

    Irshad Manji says much the same thing about the Muslim religion, just in a less confrontational way, as she is one of the ( few) reform Muslims – as opposed to moderates who do nothing- who challenge the status quo- of course, she needs bodyguards and bullet proof windows to protect her from her co- religionists. As to the climate science- if you've been following the debate – Marks summation of the facts is quite accurate- I notice no one I've read so far seems to want to take him on on that- much safer to utter anonomous ad hominen attacks… got some doozies- full moon tonight?

  • Dave

    It's against human nature and western style government to reach any far ranging agreements that will actually be executed. Look at the supposed EU as an example. Money and power is the draw in Copenhagen. If avarice is not the driving force behind AGW then why don't these Darwinists simply suggest large scale anihilation of competing organisms (other humans). Fortunately for humanity, their science is tempered by Judeo Christian culture, if not belief. So, there can be no significant reduction in emissions by way of governmental agreement; even so, reducing a miniscule percentage of the miniscule amount of human caused C02 is like trying to steer the Titanic away from the iceberg with a trillion dollar canoe paddle.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/westkraut westkraut

      You may have touched on a great solution to the CO2 problem but like you say the Christian Judean philosophy is just too gentle touse the required means to remove the most serious of the ecological stressors from our planet! If we ever reach the level of pollution, catastrophic doom and gloom predicted by the warmies, and the rogue nations continue to threaten not just the environment but our very lives, perhaps then we could then justify a nice, carbon free Green Bomb!

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/rtwngr rtwngr

    Great Article! And Michael Mann is in today's Washington post defending his "research" and calling out Sarah Palin for the way she characterizes climate change and responds to it in her state. Wonder how he found the time to write while defending himself from the investigation of academic fraud ongoing at Penn State.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/TwoYen TwoYen

    Regardless of one's carbon beliefs, Steyn's article is quite simply excellent prose. It is so rare to read something as well written as this piece.

    Congratulations to Macleans for supporting the English language! (Incidentally, I trust we are still allowed to praise English writing in Canada?)

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Grahampink Grahampink

      Only in nine provinces and two territories.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/jida jida

      Scoundrels can be eloquent, doncha know?

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Tom_Hartley Tom_Hartley

      Twoyen your are right on…well said.

  • http://www.twawki.wordpress.com twawki

    Its appalling all this is about money and power – making the green elite richer and powerful and the rest of us peasants poorer with less freedoms. We have so much to lose!

    Funny send up of scientific mag here – Nude Scientist

    http://twawki.com/2009/12/16/nude-scientist-2/

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/balabu balabu

      This is hilarious. I almost wetted my pants laughing.

  • Chris

    Great commentary, Mark.

  • Dennis_C

    I always thought that size of tree rings was an indication of a lush or difficult growing period – not temperature. If there are warm days and lots of rain then the tree will grow luxuriously. If there are cloudy days and not much rain, then bingo – little growth. So how does Steyn start equating average temperature with average growth rings?
    Also, they may not have had accurate thermometers 900 years ago, since a scale was associated with thermometers only in 1617 (see Wikipedia). So using thermometers, to measure temperature now, makes more sense that using tree rings.

    Steyn is mixing two different things and coming up with a concocted line of thinking that is supposed to debunk the theory of Global Warming. It makes an interesting read, but lousy science.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/minaka minaka

      No, it's the scientists who mixed two things to get their fake hockey stick graph as a visual to "prove" AGW as Steyn's article makes clear for anyone who read it with comprehension.

    • Canard

      Dude, did you even read? It is the "scientists" who are mixing and matching their tree ring data with their thermometer data. Steyn is pointing that out.

    • Rob H

      Read slowly Dennis. Then think.

  • agw cynic

    Everything bad is good for something. Where else but in Copenhagen we would get the Chinese government representative, comrade Wen, to admit that after sixty years of the glorious communist rule 150 million Chinese are living bellow the poverty line. (Knowing how statisticians, especially those in established dictatorships work, the real figure is probably a double of that)

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/jida jida

    Mark, just look at what the energy companies are doing to the Alberta landscape. It's reason enough to intervene.
    As for the big picture, I hope you're right. Otherwise, may you soon enjoy the fate of our decendants.

  • Thomas_L

    Why do I feel we need to find that tree and a few feet of rope? Keep on 'em Mark! It's time the bullies stopped scaring the bejeezus out of poor little kids with their nightmare tales, anyway.

  • JamesS

    Mark, you only waited a week because you waited until you had this line:

    "For one thing, it’s far harder to “hide the decline” when you’re in a Danish bordello than at the Climatic Research Unit. For another, you have to pay extra if you want a second girl to come in and “peer-review” your submission."

    Well done, as always.

  • Garry

    OK so it's not getting warmer. Who's gonna turn off the under sea burner that's melting the polar icecaps and causing decline of the cod and salmon? Or is it volcanoes?

    A Luckless Fisherman

  • JamesS

    As a geologist, I accepted the measurement that showed the Earth was warming, but was always skeptical that it was due to increased CO2 in the atmosphere. One of the things one learns when studying the geologic history of the Earth is that it has been much warmer with similar CO2 levels and much colder with higher CO2 levels. Looking at Earth's history, CO2 levels in the atmosphere seem to follow the temperature of the planet rather than vice-versa. It's like saying that the temperature of a carbonated beverage is dependent on the amount of CO2 dissolved in the Coke: the relationship goes the other way.

    What raised the red flags for me was the refusal of the CRU to release their raw data, and indeed when Phil Jones told someone (paraphrasing here) "I have twenty-five years invested in this research. Why should I give you my data when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

    No scientist who is sure of their work would behave in such a manner. The scientific method depends on reproducing others' results, and sharing data is primary to that goal — especially in a field such as climatology that depends on field measurements rather than reproducible experiments.

    The behavior of the CRU in general and Phil Jones in particular is reprehensible in the scientific world. One should have the attitude of "Take my data and prove me right. Marvel in how wonderful my insights are!"

    Anything else is hiding the decline.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Grahampink Grahampink

    How can anyone deny climate change, come one people, here where I live last week it was really cold and dry, this week quite mild and very wet. There's no denying that.
    To deny climate change is to deny the weather, which by the way has been changing on this planet for over two billion years, and for all of the two million years that humans have been schlepping around on it.

  • mongojerry

    The Demoncrats are are giving away money that we don't even have to the turd world for an envirnmental ponzi scheme sure to make our children slaves forever to China and the future One World Government . Remember when those warning of a one world Gov't were thought to be slighty paranoid. or psycho? Well children, sort of looks like they were right all along.

  • Doug

    “Er, hang on, what’s the deal with that? If we’ve got tree rings for the first nine centuries, why can’t we stick with the tree rings through the 20th?”

    If you'd be wanting a serious answer, the reason is that as atmospheric CO2 content went up, CO2 fertilization of trees disrupted the correlation between temperatures and tree rings. Besides, why would you want to use tree rings as a rough guide to what the temperature was in 1988, say, when you can just look up the answer as measured by a thermometer?

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Wakefield Wakefield Tolbert

      Indeed in principle, except it's supposed to be pure myth that CO2 works quite in that manner. It IS fertilizer to a point, but then we get told that like all good things, (too much food, too much warmth, too much of this or that comfort) is acts as a POISON and most plants can only take in so much of the good stuff before deleterious effects set in. Is this showing up, then?

      If not, then that's good news. Old nursury trick of pumping CO2 into a closed hothouse to work on the plants is well-known.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Wakefield Wakefield Tolbert

      So why not to hell with all the tree rings in that case if we can't rely on such? The answer from the AGW crowd was that it was a measure for the times when thermometers were not around–which is most of geologic history, and the big trees can in some cases go back hundreds of years or more.

      Fair enough. OK. But tree rings did not do their glorious growth-charting gigs only in stable CO2 niches and environments in the good old days. We know that at least through part of those distant ages the larger trees went through periods where CO2 went up and down and up and down like a kiddie seesaw and yet the growth rings are counted as evidence just the same. During the Viking age the ppm level of CO2 was dangerously low for plant metabolism–about 180 ppm. Under 100 ppm most plants don't metabolize well. Were the trees undergoing CO2 starvation???

      We know that some animals and plants that suffer from their respective intact of vital gases and nutrients look ematiated. (oxygen for animals, carbon dioxide for plants)

      But, also in any case, we DO use the thermometers. And so far this century they've flatlined.

      Still got some thorns here.

    • Rob H

      Yes why indeed? Unfortunately the Hadley/CRU took 150 years of thermometer temperature data, manipulated it (see leaked emails for that mess), still won't release what they did, and for added "science", destroyed the original data set. The other problem is they only selected tree rings data that fit their warming and used a sample size too small to be credible. Instead of believing the warmie statements that the email/file leaks of Hadley don't change anything why don't you read them?

    • Robert

      Oh for God's sake Doug. CO2 fertilization? Then we would expect a worldwide response from all trees showing the effects of CO2 fertilization. Unfortunately, there is no such response- this is grasping at straws to the extreme. As for the graph – it shows the relationship of tree ring width over the last millenia. You don't just tack on temperature at the end of a graph which shows an entirely different relationship. This is grade school math!

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/gnftr11 gnftr11

    I'm a corporate pilot and I wish that Mr. Pachauri and the rest of the IPCC would use my jets to go back and forth to their cricket games. On a more serious note however, I worked in Okinawa in the military during the Kyoto treaty fiasco and had to dispatch FIVE CH-53E Super Stallion helicopters to support then Vice President Gore and his media gang. A friend of mine who flew one of those helos said they burned over 65,000 gallons of jet fuel. Folks, that's a lot of carbon.

    • virgil

      mr pachauri and al gore should be tarred and feathered!

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/AlcoveOne AlcoveOne

    Like Barack Hussein Obama, is it political correct to mention the middle name of Hans Christian Andersen?

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Grahampink Grahampink

      Barack Hussein Obama mmm mmm mmm.

From Macleans