“MERCHANTS OF DOUBT”

Robert Renner is a very clever filmmaker, although not a very honest one. He opened his film at the Magic Castle in Hollywood with a magician explaining the slight off hand. If you can divert people’s attention from what you are actually doing, you can make them believe something else.

He then spent the first part of his film showing endless clips of tobacco company executives saying smoking doesn’t cause cancer. Ahhhh…..am I’m a little slow here, am I supposed to believe that proves global warming skeptics are lying? Scientists whose life long research doesn’t agree with the catastrophic claims of Warmers are equal to highly paid tobacco executives who make a living selling cigarettes?

The film then went on to slander well known skeptics such as Senator Jim Inhofe, “Junk Science” Steve Malloy and Austrian-born, physicist and emeritus professor of environmental science at the University of Virginia, Fred Singer, among others. The film implies they are funded by BIG oil, tobacco and chemical companies to deny anthropogenic global warming. Professor Singer’s work had been highly respected for decades. He was a leading scientist in our early space research and was involved in the development of observation satellites. But we’re to believe he all of a sudden decided to take bribes from oil companies to deny science.

By the way, I don’t understand the demonization of oil companies. Cheap abundant oil is directly responsible for the development of this country, the high standard of living we all enjoy (even our poorest), and our ability to travel where and when we want. You can’t compare oil companies to tobacco companies whose product does none of those things.

James Hansen was heavily featured in Merchants of Doubt. Hansen served as head of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies from 1981 to 2013. He is one of the most well known global warming activists. Hansen did extensive studies of Venus and asserts that several billion years ago Venus’s atmosphere was more like earth’s but greenhouse gases caused the temperature to increase to the point life was not possible. Hmm, yet there is no evidence SUV’s were ever on Venus.

Hansen has become more of an activist than a scientist these days. He has been arrested several times protesting the Keystone pipeline. Physicist Freeman Dyson criticized Hansen saying, “Hansen has turned his science into ideology”. Fifty former NASA astronauts, engineers and scientists wrote a letter to Hansen objecting to his using NASA and the Goddard Institute to promote what they believe is NOT “settled science”. I guess the film didn’t have time to include that information.
https://ricochet.com/archives/50-nasa-scientists-against-global-warming/

One of the most prominent people featured in the film (as she co-authored it) was Naomi Oreskes. She is a Professor of the History of Science at Harvard University.

Oreskes asserts there are only a “handful” of scientists who obscure the truth of global warming. She claims (as all Warmers do) that a “consensus of scientists”, in fact 97%, all believe in anthropogenic global warming. She claims that “handful” of skeptics are denying the facts and fighting science. She implies but never proves, they are being funded by BIG Oil, BIG Tobacco and BIG Chemical companies.

Oreskes then mentions “The PetitionProject” that 31,000+ scientists signed. She dismisses it out of hand. She said Mickey Mouse and other phony signatures appear on the petition. Even if that were true, how would that discount the thousands of real scientists who signed it? However, it isn’t true. I met the scientists who circulated the petition at the Climate Change Conference in Las Vegas last July. Dr. Willie Soon sat at my table. He explained, while they were collecting signatures, they heard people were going to sign phony names to debunk the project so they vetted EVERY SINGLE name……and still the Warmers make the claim because who is going to go through 31K signatures to prove them wrong?

Oreskes claim of a consensus of scientists was debunked:
http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/15624-cooking-climate-consensus-data-97-of-scientists-affirm-agw-debunked
However, that isn’t mentioned in the film either.

One of the more amusing segments (and I’m not sure why they included it as it doesn’t help their argument) was focused on former Republican Congressman Bob Inglis. He explained that he had changed his mind on global warming when he visited the Artic several times and saw ice cores that showed CO2 increased after the industrial revolution (did he see ice cores from the Jurassic period when CO2 was 5 times higher than now?). http://www.livescience.com/44330-jurassic-dinosaur-carbon-dioxide.html

Inglis introduced HR2380 that imposed a carbon tax. He was primaried the next election and lost BIG TIME to Trey Gowdy. Apparently, Inglis is still running for something. The film followed him from a speaking engagement to a local radio station where he was interviewed by a host who was a skeptic and cut his interview short.

Oreskes and others in the film frame themselves as the “good guys” and the skeptics as the “bad guys”. They accuse skeptics (bad guys) of being free market fundamentalists who oppose environmental regulations, but, although, they acknowledge many environmentalists (good guys) are socialists who love regulations, they say that doesn’t mean global warming is a myth (nor does it mean it isn’t).

According to Oreskes the public doesn’t have a good grasp of the essential scientific facts about global warming and that is the fault of the skeptics and the media coverage of their disinformation. Actually, studies have shown the media coverage of global warming is very much weighted in favor of anthropologic global warming.
Oreskes admits all the problems caused by global warming (if it were true and catastrophic) require BIG government to address. But she says it’s necessary because “People Will Die”.

“Merchants of Doubt” is based on a book by Naomi Oreskes and Erik M. Conway. The following is an objective review of the book and this film: http://www.academia.edu/4754580/Debunking_skeptical_propaganda_Book_review_of_Oreskes_Conway_Merchants_of_Doubt

Advertisements

About madderthanhell

Retired casting director. Mother of two daughters. Grandmother of twin boys and two step grandsons. Lived in California all my life. Co-organizer of two Tea Parties. Past member of Republican Central Committee.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to “MERCHANTS OF DOUBT”

  1. Good job on the review! I’ve written my own, which will probably appear at AmericanThinker.com in the next day or two. As a matter of fact-checking, I did a Google search of the movie name and the name Trey Goudy, since I make a particular note of what happened when I watched the movie and he appeared unidentified in the movie for just a fleeting second. As you note in your review, Rrep Inglis’ case about being a real conservative is undermined by just the sight of Gowdy. Inglis also dropped an egg into a jar of vinegar in his last congressional hearing in order to illustrate ocean acidification….. problem is, the oceans are alkaline (just a teensy bit less so over the last decades) while vinegar is way over on the acid side of the pH scale. Spectacularly anti-science, Inglis is.

    One more point: I don’t refer to specific details in my own review about the movie’s wipeout on its assertions over the Oregon Petition Project, but you may be interested to see that I dived deeply into the smear of the petition at American Thinker way back in 2010: “The Curious History of ‘Global Climate Disruption'” http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2010/10/the_curious_history_of_global.html One of the enviro-activists in Oreskes’ movie had a key role in that long-ago smear attempt.

    As I say in my own review, this movie employs misdirection to make a false accusation that skeptic climate scientists ‘misdirect’ the public. That is all global warming believers have ever really had as a defense for their position, since they refuse to engage in scientific debate, and it explains their tactic of demonizing the fossil fuel industry. Somebody came up with the idea of creating a parallel of tobacco industry shills to skeptic climate scientists / fossil fuel interests when there is no such evidence for that, and my focus has been exposing the total wipeout of that accusation – please see my blog GelbspanFiles.com

    • Thank you, Russell, I consider that high praise. Willie Soon, who is being personally attacked by the Left these days (see my blog, “Climate Change Alarmists Desperation”), was one of the scientists who circulated the petition. He knew the Alarmists would try to discredit it.

      • Anytime. Dr Soon contributed to my blog in 2013 ( Dr. Willie Soon Guest Comment: “Is What I Say Beyond the Boundaries of Reasonable Discussion?”http://gelbspanfiles.com/?p=609 ), pointing out a particular failure on the part of enviro-activists, namely to engage him on his science assessments. They can’t, thus the necessity for them to resort to character assassination – it’s the only arrow in their defense arsenal for AGW. Anthony Watts reproduced one of my other blog posts at his place, which showed how the recent attack on Dr Soon comes from just one small clique of enviro-activists circa the mid- late-1990s, which included John Passacantando, the person seen prominently in Merchants of Doubt: Greenpeace: The roots of Climate Smearhttp://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/02/26/the-origin-of-climate-smear/

        “Greenpeace USA née Ozone Action”, is my preferred term for the epicenter of the smear of skeptic climate scientists. Maybe this time around we can get a congressional investigation of that clique.

  2. From your lips to Gods ears. I love this recent revelation http://dailycaller.com/2015/05/22/former-un-lead-author-global-warming-caused-by-natural-variations-in-climate/

    Maybe Phillip Lloyd should tell Obama.

    Steve Malloy posted my report on Michael Mann’s talk at the Hammer Museum on Junk Science.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s