Beyond The Commons

Aaron Wherry covers all the goings-on in and around Parliament Hill. Follow Aaron on Twitter: @aaronwherry

Categories: Beyond The Commons, Capital Read

Somewhere Stephane Dion nods quietly

by Aaron Wherry on Tuesday, August 31, 2010 12:35pm - 0 Comments

The world’s most high-profile climate change sceptic is to declare that global warming is “undoubtedly one of the chief concerns facing the world today” and “a challenge humanity must confront”, in an apparent U-turn that will give a huge boost to the embattled environmental lobby…

In a Guardian interview, he said he would finance investment through a tax on carbon emissions that would also raise $50bn to mitigate the effect of climate change, for example by building better sea defences, and $100bn for global healthcare.

Tags: bjorn lomborg, carbon tax, climate change, Stéphane Dion

More by Aaron Wherry

Emily

It takes a big man to admit he was wrong, and an even bigger one to then work to rectify the situation.

ChrisWPG

From the article…

"Lomborg denies he has performed a volte face, pointing out that even in his first book he accepted the existence of man-made global warming. "The point I've always been making is it's not the end of the world," he told the Guardian."

So who admitted they were wrong?

Emily

Face-saving rhetoric aside….everyone is aware of what he's done.

ChrisWPG

Considering your first post was within 3 minutes of Wherry's article going on line, you didn't read the piece he was referring to.

Emily

I read it early this morning.
ChrisWPG

Then I guess it's your comprehension skills that are lacking
Emily

Think you could get over your fascination with me, and focus on solutions to global warming?
ChrisWPG

You aren't going to solve global warming making nonsensical arguments.
Emily

So stop doing it.
PolJunkie

You two get a room already…
Stewart_Smith

ick

Mike T.

OMG PERMENANT TAX ON EVERYTHING!!!!
Zinfandel

Predictably for Aaron he snippets the article in order to make it look like Lomborg came around to, say, the Dion view, when the context shows otherwise. Thus, you get little Liberal bot commanders squealing about how Lomborg supposedly admitted he was wrong, when in fact in the article he explicitly emphasizes the continuity of his views – which are still nothing Dion-like. But you would never know this from Wheery’s carefully chosen snippet, and thus the little Liberal trolls (who could never be bothers to do something like actually read an article) don’t know it either, which is just how Wherey wants it, cause hey, he’s a professional Liberal propagandist and shill – even more leases long sine gone. The Liberals lost, Aaron, and they will lose again and again and again. Trying to motivate your fellow shills with misleading editing techniques won’t change that.

ChrisWPG

While I don't agree with your conclusions, I must admit this was not Aaron's best piece.

Carson

I'm not sure if this is "an apparent U-Turn." He advocates pretty much the same thing in his book, Cool It
Emily

LOL ahhh that river in Egypt is full today.
Holly Stick

Lomborg will probably says whatever will sell his books. Still, it's a good sign that more rats are leaving the SS (sinking ship) Denial.

Such as Michael Hanlon, who went and looked at the Arctic for himself:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-13…

klem

You're joking right? Back here on earth, the last poll I saw said that Believers are down to 34% of the public, and still falling. I think it's the alarmists who are jumping from the ship.

Even at the G8 & G20, the subject was not even discussed. So how can Lomborg conclude that climate change is "one of the chief concerns facing the world today", when even the world leaders have abandonded it.

Cheer up. The climate scare is over. Go home, you lost.

Holly Stick

Where's the link to your poll? Not that public opinion actually affects the scientific reality.

Go tell the Russians the climate scare is over, even though they had temperatures over 40 degrees C and many died of heat stroke. Go tell the people of Pakistan the climate emergency is over, as the flooding continues. Go find out about the real world.

And let us know if you find any national academy of science or professional scientific association which says AGW is not occurring.

Kyle Bailey

Gosh…..I had the exact same thought about his evolution of views being related to the market for books…proposing outlandish ideas for mitigation of climate change (which might even be necesary)….probably has more marketing potential than yet another book claiming that GW isn't so bad.

Holly Stick

Well yes, his opinion is not worth much to anybody – except the deniosaurs will have to find some other con man else to quote now.

Amateur Hour

Speaking of Lomborg and Dion: One of the biggest silences of recent years in Canadian politics occurred during the last election. The CEO of the world's biggest oil company, ExxonMobil's Rex Tillerson, advocated a carbon tax vs a "wall street of emissions traders" (cap and trade). With the exception of the Montreal Gazette, not one major media outlet in Canada covered the story. Not a peep. During an election when the carbon tax was a major issue, Canada was an information wasteland.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/…

To be fair(ish) to Lomborg, his positions usually had more to do with "What else could we do with all of the money it would take to fight carbon emissions/climate change?" vs. "There is no such thing" … though he didn't exactly distance himself from the ostrich crew, either.

Emily

No, sadly there was little in the Canadian media beyond mocking Dion's English, and repetition of Harper's catch phrase.

Mark R

Even more interestins was IPCC head man Mr. Pachauri going from comparing Lomborg to a Nazi to praising him. UGH!
This is definitly an increase in the volume for AGW by Lomborg but for anyone who has read his book know, its not a U turn at all.
I have not read his latest book but I think it is more around what are we going to do about climate change if that is where we are going. Do it effectively and smartly.
I suspect his copenhagen consensus is still valid for him about the worlds biggest problems.
bergkamp

"The world’s most high-profile climate change sceptic is to declare that global warming … "

Who cares what Lomborg thinks? It is just another left winger who wants to raise taxes to fight a problem that is not occurring. I had more respect for Lomborg when he actually took a position, now he's just tired of the grief he gets from green types and has caved.

Why did Lomborg change his mind when there has been no warming as Phil Jones has even acknowledged.

" Question: Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming?

Answer: Yes, but only just."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8511670.stm

Holly Stick

You understand that he meant it was not 95% significant, as he said in the next sentence, don't you? "… This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significant at the 95% significance level…" Because that was looking at a trend only 15 years long.

And then you read the next two sentences, didn't you? "… The positive trend is quite close to the significance level. Achieving statistical significance in scientific terms is much more likely for longer periods, and much less likely for shorter periods…"

Emily

Well Lomborg is now a 'left-winger', so minds have wandered.

http://stumblingabordeaux.blogspot.com Pato31

"Who cares what Lomborg thinks? It is just another left winger who wants to raise taxes to fight a problem that is not occurring."

Good God, why do you bother commenting on here if you've decided before the page even loads that you're just going to dismiss anything that is written as left-wing propaganda.

TJCook

I know, right?

This just killed me: "now he's just tired of the grief he gets from green types and has caved."

It sure must be nice to live in your own little world.

Emily

Canada could have been a world leader on this, and made a ton of money by now.

Deniers have done enormous damage to the planet.

Holly Stick

That much is true; we should be leading in developing renewable technology, instead of letting the Stupid Conservatives live in denial and drag us all down. The Liberals were neglectful and should be panned for it as well; but the Harper Conservatives have taken stupid neglect and self-delusion to new depths.
ChrisWPG

I agree we could have and should have been world leaders on this, but I fail to see how we could have made money off of it YET. If a ton of money could have been made I would think in our capitalistic society somebody would have done it by now, and please correct me if I'm wrong but nobody has made a ton of money off of global warming.

Holly Stick

We are too busy giving corporate welfare to the fossil fuels industries to invest in renewables. You don't think our "capitalists" would move without geting corporate welfare first, do you?

ChrisWPG

No. But I still think if a "ton of money" could have been made by now somebody somewhere would have done it. I'm not saying there won't be demand and money to be made in the future, I'm objecting to the premise that "Canada could have… made a ton of money by now"

Emily

Nobody could see how you could make money off cars or lightbulbs or phones or TV or computers either.

But we did.
Steve M

"…please correct me if I'm wrong but nobody has made a ton of money off of global warming."

Al Gore, for one.

ChrisWPG

HAHAHAHA I stand corrected!!

klem

Deniers have saved us all.

Rick

This post is a very good example of how misinformative and frankly partisan Aaron Whhery’s method of presenting de-contextualized fragments of articles under snarky but unelaborated headlines can be. What Lomborg says in the actual article is rather nuanced, and does not show a fundamental shift in his thought. He goes out of his way to show how, on the “big questions”, his position is consistent. This is s pragmatic change, not an ideological one. It makes him a little less closer to Harper (although there were always differences between them), but still a great distance from Dion. Sadly, Aaron’s quotation method strips the piece of all context and nuance, and by presenting it with nothing but a snarky headline, he makes the piece seem partisan when it really isn’t. Nothing to proud of there, Mr. Wheery.

Emily

Dog paddle, right?

Probably best in De Nile.

ChrisWPG

Emily, your not winning anyone to your (our) side with your "de nile" rhetoric. Truth is Aaron missed the mark on this one. There will be plenty of other arguments that will come up in the coming days and weeks that this might apply to but not here.

Emily

I don't have a 'side'….and neither do you.

All you've done so far is criticize Aaron and myself.

ChrisWPG

and all you've done is misinterpret the article and accuse those who actually read it of denying the contents.
Emily

Get a room by yourself.
Claudia Lemire

Hahaha, Emily that was funny!
Claudia Lemire

Oh cmo'n who thumbed me down, our Emily was quite funny!
ChrisWPG

Wasn't me, I gave you both thumbs up for the chuckle :P
Claudia Lemire

Hahaha, thanks!

John D

presenting de-contextualized fragments of articles under snarky but unelaborated headlines

Isn't that what blogging is?

Rick

Um, not exactly, no. See Wells, Potter, Geddes, Weinman, all on this site alone. Blogging doesn’t have to abandon analytical rigour or acurrate representation. That’s just mr. Wheery’s style, evidently.

Amateur Hour

While there is certainly nuance and evolution taking place regarding Lomborg's positions, one thing is starkly clear: The Copenhagen Consensus has pretty much arrived at opposite conclusions concerning climate to the ones it's held since 2004. Wherry's citations aside, that is big news, nuanced or otherwise.

The CC was backed by the Economist and a conservative Danish government and often cited as a contrarian counterpoint in many of the carbon/climate debates. Lomborg himself became a bit of a darling with the "do nothing or nothing can be done" camp. Now "do nothing or nothing can be done" camp has lost one of it's heralds.

Emily

Yes, indeed they did, and right snorty they are about it too. LOL
klem

I don't give a rats-ass about this Lomborg guy. The US has dropped Cap&trade so we won't have C&T either, that's all that matters.

Crit_Reasoning

As ChrisWPG, Rick, Mark R, and others have pointed out, Wherry dropped the ball on this one. The snarky title and lead-in don't do justice to the article he links to, and it makes it seem as though Wherry briefly skimmed the article before latching on to a superficial similarity to Dion (carbon tax) and cutting and pasting it. The whole effort probably took a minute or two.

On the bright side, Wherry's preceding blog post ("The Unexperienced Lifer") was very good and thought provoking.

Olaf

On the bright side, Wherry's preceding blog post ("The Unexperienced Lifer") was very good and thought provoking.

That explains why this post has 42 comments and that one 15: few people around here like to have their thoughts provoked in any way. Personally, I wish Wherry would leave my thoughts alone – they appear to be just fine as is and I don't like having to discard or reevaluate any of them.

ChrisWPG

Oh lets be honest, 36 of the comments were on the quality of the blog and some of it's readers and had nothing to do with the topic.

Claudia Lemire

Agreed not one of his best, but please let's talk about this
http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20100831/ign…

Crit_Reasoning

I actually believe that the police rank and file are more likely to oppose the registry, while the chiefs and administrators are more likely to support it. Iggy's "police or Harper" challenge is pure posturing.

Claudia Lemire

I know his challange is all talk but it bogs me, hahaha, I guess I got up in the wrong side of the bed ; )

Claudia Lemire

Please, please, please let's get started!

ChrisWPG

What is there to discuss? Iggy put it out there, your either with the police or with Harper. Pretty cut and dry. I'm with the police on this one : )

Stewart_Smith

It is amusing how Wherry's cut & paste raises such ire (especially if there is Dion in the air). I agree that the 180 characterization is out of line… but that is really what the Guardian wrote not Aaron.

I took it that perhaps Dion should have considered becoming an author on climate issues rather than a politician activist. Certainly anyone who has heard Dion talk and read anything substantive the man has written is struck by his talent for the latter and challenges with the former.

As to Lomborg's 127 degree shift on the issue, he has clearly decided to shift his marketing (and suggestions for action)
much more than his analysis. This might led him credibility for consistency with some, to me it just shows that his judgement was flawed and that he is consistent.
Stewart_Smith

If you and the others keep picking on Iggy, your punishment will be the return of Prime Minister Trudeau!

But Dion has handled his bumpy ride with class, much as Joe Clark did years before. While both had their flaws (especially as leaders), their careers are consistent with a remarkable commitment to public service.

Claudia Lemire

Agreed on Dion but Iggy is toast : )

Stewart_Smith

Not sure why you would pick that link, are you propping up Wherry again?

"Lomborg’s latest proposal for the creation of a $100 billion climate change fund is hardly a major divergence from his longstanding position: that Western nations should do more, much more, to alleviate third world poverty and suffering. My suspicion is that he is dressing up his international call-to-arms as a “climate change” issue as much as anything because he knows that that’s where most of the funding is and that this is where his best chance of success lies."

Use a carbon tax to raise money divert the money to pay for social engineering… isn't that the Green Shift?

Crit_Reasoning

Use a carbon tax to raise money divert the money to pay for social engineering… isn't that the Green Shift?

Not unless Dion was planning to use the Green Shift proceeds to fund projects overseas. And it's a huge stretch to say that Lomberg proposes to use carbon taxes to "pay for social engineering".

Stewart_Smith

Ok,, so Dion proposed a Green Shift, using a carbon tax to transfer wealth to the poorest Canadians.

Lomborg is proposing a carbon tax that would be used to transfer wealth to the third world, but with the proviso that they spend it on health care.

So your conclusion is Dion did not go far enough?

Crit_Reasoning

Lomborg is proposing a carbon tax that would be used to transfer wealth to the third world, but with the proviso that they spend it on health care.

I'm not sure why you think Lomborg is proposing to fund third world health care using carbon taxes. He's calling for a global tax on carbon emissions to fund $150 billion in new investment annually for clean energy development, climate engineering and climate change adaptations like building sea walls to protect low-lying areas from sea-level rise. Some of this money would be spent on climate change adaptations in the third world.

Stewart_Smith

Sorry I was confused by this

"$50bn to mitigate the effect of climate change, for example by building better sea defences, and $100bn for global healthcare"
Crit_Reasoning

Ah, thanks. I'd read a different article that gave the impression that his "third world health care" proposal was separate from the carbon tax proposal. I guess not. According to the Guardian article he really is suggesting that the carbon tax should raise $250 bn, with $150 bn for climate change and $100 bn for health care.

Anyway, your "wealth transfer" point is cute but I think we both know there's very little in common between the Green Shift and what Lomborg is proposing.
Stewart_Smith

Thanks for that end bit. I have already agreed with bergkamp today and my head was about to implode. I don't normally equal cute with "brilliant and devastating" but I then have always had an issue with Albertan dialects.
Crit_Reasoning

Heh. I like your moxie. ;-)

Mark R

You didn't see the video on election night did you? The one where Dion was storming out and pushing ctv people away. You have a low sense of class.

Stewart_Smith

I try to judge people by their best, not their worst. I don't always succeed, but I do try.

Claudia Lemire

I agree with my equilibrium friend : )

Loraine Lamontagne

You didn't read the findings from the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council, did you? http://www.cbc.ca/arts/media/story/2009/05/28/ctv…

I was in Australia the night of the last election so I missed Dion's storming out but I am happy to hear that he did this. He displayed excellent judgment. I don't care if it displeases you to see a Frenchie stand on his own two feet when confronted by unethical bigots.

CAPS

While Lomberg is fairly consistent in his views he was certainly cited by many a right-winger in order to justify not doing a single thing about climate change and global warming.

The country missed a real opportunity to move ahead on so many fronts when Harper got his second minority.