UK government functionaries Richard Black and the BBC now say the oceans are in scary shape:
6/20/11, "
World's oceans in 'shocking' decline," BBC, Richard Black
Nothing Richard Black says on the topic of climate can be taken seriously as he is an employee of the UK government which has millions if not billions at stake in the global warming industry. For example:
In 2007 UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown said the carbon market was key The
financial survival of the UK monarchy is dependent on the success of the global warming industry. The monarchy as
reported has a new income arrangement which relies in part on wind turbine income. Prince Charles isn't technically with the government but he acts in a governmental role in
pushing the global warming agenda part of which reportedly includes
starving children. You may have noticed:
10/24/10, "'
It is wholly inappropriate that the Palace should have such a direct interest in a subject like windfarms, given Prince Charles's obsession with renewable energy. It raises the question as to whether he is seeking to increase his own
each time he makes a favourable reference to wind power.'"
---------------------
Money could be lost if the BBC and Richard Black said, 'the oceans are doing fine.'
Ben Pile wasn't intimidated by the maze of 'coalitions' encountered in an effort to ascertain "the science" mentioned in BBC/Richard Black articles about the 'shocking' state of global oceans."
6/20/11, "A Deep Sea Mystery," Climate-Resistance.org, Ben Pile
"Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the water… 6/20/11, "World's oceans in 'shocking' decline," BBC, Richard Black
Warns Richard Black at the BBC.
The oceans are in a worse state than previously suspected, according to an expert panel of scientists.
In a new report, they warn that ocean life is “at high risk of entering a phase of extinction of marine species unprecedented in human history”.
They conclude that issues such as over-fishing, pollution and climate change are acting together in ways that have not previously been recognised.
The impacts, they say, are already affecting humanity.
The panel was convened by the International Programme on the State of the Ocean (IPSO), and brought together experts from different disciplines, including coral reef ecologists, toxicologists, and fisheries scientists."...
Call me a cynic, but I no longer take claims about ‘expert panel of scientists’ at face value. Sadly, Richard Black of the BBC does.
Who are the International Programme on the State of the Ocean (IPSO) anyway? A visit to their website barely gives any information about itself at all. It doesn’t appear even to have an email address, let alone a postal address. There is no mention of who is running it, or what organisations are involved. Isn’t that a bit odd, for ‘an expert panel of scientists’.
Looking at the final report [PDF] produced by IPSO, there is similarly little mention of the organisation’s relationship to the rest of the world, such that we can see for ourselves what kind of a panel of experts they really are. However, at the top of the report is the following text:
The Deep Sea Conservation Coalition (DSCC) is a coalition of over 60 organizations worldwide promoting fisheries conservation and the protection of biodiversity on the high seas. The DSCC has been actively involved in the international debate and negotiations concerning the adverse impacts on deep-sea biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction from bottom trawling and other methods of bottom fishing on the high seas since 2003/2004.
Ok. So who the hell are the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition?
Surprise, surprise…
A coordination team works together with a Steering Group that currently consists of the Ecology Action Centre, Greenpeace International, Marine Conservation Biology Institute, Natural Resources Defense Council, Pew Environment Group and Seas at Risk. The DSCC has developed a formidable international team of scientists, policy and communication experts, lawyers and political activists who on behalf of the deep sea have established a strong reputation and profile on the issue at the UN and in other fora.
The ‘panel of experts’ — IPSO — may well be expert. But, look, again, we see Greenpeace’s name up there, steering the research — in its own words — alongside the Pew group, and Friends of the Earth.
I don’t believe a word of it. This is not scientific research, it’s ‘grey literature’, put out by yet another grey institution, the true nature of which is concealed from first appearances. Not far behind, the agenda is revealed.
UPDATE.
I’ve been browsing the IPSO site, which is very poorly designed. The most charitable thing I can say about IPSO is that it is a project by Dr Alex Rogers, to pass himself off as an international research programme. Here he is, talking about the end of the world, like all good zoologists should."...
I made a bit of a mistake above. I thought that the front page would list its most recent research. It turns out that the research I was looking at, which was sponsored by DSCC was last year’s. This year’s project was sponsored by The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). So who are the IUCN?
[The IUCN] helps the world find pragmatic solutions to our most pressing environment and development challenges. It supports scientific research, manages field projects all over the world and brings governments, non-government organizations, United Nations agencies, companies and local communities together to develop and implement policy, laws and best practice.
IUCN is the world’s oldest and largest global environmental network – a democratic membership union with more than 1,000 government and NGO member organizations, and almost 11,000 volunteer scientists in more than 160 countries.
IUCN’s work is supported by more than 1,000 professional staff in 60 offices and hundreds of partners in public, NGO and private sectors around the world. The Union’s headquarters are located in Gland, near Geneva, Switzerland.
So, yeah, another NGO lobbying outfit, in cahoots with government and businesses, blurring the lines between activism, scientific research, and so on.
Back to IPSO. Here’s the web-page that relates to the new report. It describes the background to the report:
The 3 day workshop, co-sponsored by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), looked at the latest science across different disciplines.
The 27 participants from 18 organisations in 6 countries produced a grave assessment of current threats — and a stark conclusion about future risks to marine and human life if the current trajectory of damage continues: that the world’s ocean is at high risk of entering a phase of extinction of marine species unprecedented in human history.
So it turns out that this report took the scientists just three days of chin-wagging. Says the report:
The workshop provided a rare opportunity to interact with other disciplines to determine the net effect of what is already happening to the ocean and is projected to do so in the future. Over the three days 27 participants from 18 organisations in 6 countries (Annex 1) assessed the latest information on impacts and stresses, and the synergistic effects these are having on the global ocean.
Through presentations, discussions and recommendations the workshop documented and described the cumulative effects of such impacts, how these commonly act in a negatively synergistic way, and why therefore concerted action is now needed to address the consequences set out in this report.
Now, this is being presented as the product of a scientific process. But it turns out that it’s a little conference of self-selecting individuals, clearly given to a particular agenda.
The scientific outcomes from this workshop will be used first and foremostto strengthen the case for greater action to reduce anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide related to climate change and ocean acidification while also reducing other stressors. The findings underscore the need for more effective management of fisheries and pollution and for strengthening protection of the 64% of the ocean that lies beyond the zones of national jurisdiction. They thereby form a major contribution to implementation of the major IPSO report on the Global State of the Ocean. This event follows on from the IPSO/Royal Society event in 2009 that focussed on the future for coral reefs.
But in what way is the product of the 3-day gloom-fest a ‘scientific outcome’? No doubt, with a fancy name like ‘International Programme on the State of the Ocean’, citations to the report it produces will impress people. Indeed, it sounds like an expensive, exhaustive survey of the world. But it was just a couple of dozen eco-warriors in a single room, chatting about their fears.
UPDATE #2
Barry Woods has emailed me with a bit more on the profiles of some of the attendees of this ‘expert panel’ — the 27 people behind the “World’s oceans in ‘shocking’ decline” report.
The attendees are listed on page 10 of the report. [PDF]
Barry Gardiner is Labour MP for Brent North, and Vice President Globe UK, the Global Legislators Organisation. Globe’s about pages say,
there exists a strategic opportunity to coordinate a legislative response to key global environmental challenges in advance of Rio +20. This response recognises and seeks to strengthen the central role of legislators and parliaments in tackling the major global environmental challenges, as well as placing a much greater emphasis on the role of legislators in holding governments more effectively to account for the implementation of international commitments.
I wonder what Barry Gardiner knows about marine ecology. He has a degree in philosophy, apparently, so not much then. So much for this panel of experts…
Dan Laffoley is Marine Vice Chair of the International Union for Conservation of Nature, which seems to be the current sponsor, and is discussed above. Joining him is his colleague Aurelie Spadone.
Kelly Rigg - Executive Director, Global Campaign for Climate Action. No obvious expertise in marine biology, it says here,
Kelly Rigg is the Executive Director of the GCCA, a global alliance of 250 organizations cooperating under the banner of the tcktcktck campaign. She has been leading international campaigns for nearly 30 years on climate, energy, oceans, Antarctica and other issues. She was a senior campaign director for Greenpeace International during 20 years with the organization. After leaving Greenpeace she went on to found the Varda Group consultancy providing campaign and strategic advice to a wide range of NGOs, and led the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition’s campaign to protect the high seas from destructive bottom fishing.
Josh Reichert is Managing Director of the Pew Environment Group. They say of themselves,
In 1998, the Trusts established the Pew Center on Global Climate Change for the purpose of providing credible information, straight answers and innovative solutions to address global climate change. At the inception, the Business Environmental Leadership Council was created to engage the businesses community in the climate debate. The council included 46 companies, mainly Fortune 500 firms with combined revenue of more than $2 trillion and over 4 million employees. In 2007, the Pew Center played a major role in launching the U.S. Climate Action Partnership, an unprecedented alliance of nonprofit organizations and leading businesses—including General Electric and all three major U.S. automobile manufacturers—in support of federal emissions-reduction legislation.
Although Reichart “he has written more than 60 publications and co-produced films on the plight of fisheries and marine ecosystems“, it’s hard to see what expertise he has in marine ecology… “Mr. Reichert holds an undergraduate degree in applied behavioral sciences from the University of California, Davis, and master’s and doctoral degrees in social anthropology from Princeton University”.
Conn Nugent is Executive Director of the JM Kaplan Fund
The Environment Program concentrates on marine conservation, especially in ocean waters that lie beyond the jurisdiction of a single national government. The program currently supports grantees working to: create international protections for species and ecoregions of the High Seas; educate scientists and the public about the value and vulnerability of the ocean as a world system; and foment civil society movements to protect Arctic waters and Arctic coastal communities.
Conn Nugent’s blog profile gives no indication of his or her qualifications in marine science:
Highlights: • Exec Dir, JM Kaplan Fund (2000-present). Programs in environment, historic preservation, immigration: US, Mexico, Cuba, worldwide. • Exec Dir, Intl Physicians for Prevention Nuclear War. 1985 Nobel Peace Prize. • Founder/editor, LibertyTree.org, GothamGazette.org, WeLoveTheIraqiInformationMinister.org. • Freelance writer, editor, graphic designer. Harvard College, Harvard Law School. Peace Corps. Teacher. Exec Dir: Planned Parenthood California; Bay State Charitable Trust; New Alchemy Inst; Five Colleges; Citizens Union. Prog Dir, Nathan Cummings Foundation. Articles on land use, architecture, defense, fiscal policy, medicine, sports.
So, not much evidence of the scientific expertise that is being claimed of this team. Yet there are a number of agendas at the table. And some well-funded agendas, at that."
----------------------------------
Comments
Liked:
"David says:
You should also note that the only other person identified on the IPSO team was the former head of media for Greenpeace – she is doing a good job as Richard’s innocent little article has been re-Tweeted and shared in their network over 14.000 times in four hours. See http://risk-monger.blogactiv.eu/2011/06/20/ipso-%E2%80%93-facto-%E2%80%93-the-decline-of-the-bbc%E2%80%99s-media-integrity/."
-----------------------------------
Didn't like-emotional- thinks it's settled science
"Reader says:
“I don’t believe a word of it.” Which just makes you an idiot.
Now that you have publicly announced your idiocy, why don’t you do some REAL research yourself, instead of spouting off about things you obviously know nothing about?
I really, really wonder about all you anti-science, anti-evidence, anti-fact people. What in hell are you going to do when reality finally slaps you upside your thick heads?
Maybe YOU won’t starve, but others will. Or maybe YOU won’t see your fishing decline, but others will (and are). Maybe YOU won’t experience climate change effects first hand, sitting on your butts in your air conditioned offices, but others will (and are).
I’m basically SICK TO DEATH of morons and fools who think that they can outguess the world’s leading experts, using nothing more then their (unqualified) opinions as their ‘evidence’ (or straw arguments).
You people are IDIOTS. Truly STUPID beyond belief. The science data is there and it has been analyzed and reanalyzed again and again by the world’s leading experts and STILL you don’t accept any of it as fact.
Which must makes you quite simply, STUPID.
Willfully stupid in fact, which makes you dangerous. You’re all guilty of helping the decline, believe it or not, because a lot of other people will accept your unqualified opinions and agree with you.
Now we’ve got tons more STUPID PEOPLE DOING STUPID THINGS like continuing to contribute to the decline, with overfishing, dumping pollutants, increasing their own greenhouse gas contribution and overall just ‘going about their business with nary a care in the world’.
I hope you FOOLS LIKE JELLYFISH BURGERS."
------------------------------
""We do worry a lot that there is not much coordination between those working on the taxation, the regulation and the pricing of carbon," said IETA's Derwent."...
5/30/11, "Exclusive: EU energy plan threatens carbon billions," Reuters, Pete Harrison
"The Europe Union's carbon market could be flooded with excess pollution permits over the next decade, cutting prices in half and depriving governments of billions in budgeted revenues, EU sources say.
"There's a real concern of negative impacts on prices if the issue is not properly addressed," one EU source said on condition of anonymity. "Some of the studies imply that carbon prices will collapse."
It is not clear, however, whether European governments will support measures that would erode carbon prices, which would put a severe dent in budgeted government revenues in 2013-2020.
It would also undermine investment in green technology, a key economic driver in countries such as Germany and Denmark.
The new "energy services directive," due in late June, will propose cutting energy consumption in buildings, vehicles and more controversially, industry. ...
LEAKED STUDY
One leaked study seen by Reuters foresees carbon prices falling to 14 euros per tonne, compared to a business-as-usual price of 25 euros. Another sees the price dropping to zero.
"The energy services directive could potentially wipe out billions of euros for governments across the EU, unless EU ETS allowances are set aside," said Sanjeev Kumar at environment consultancy E3G.
The Commission's energy spokeswoman, Marlene Holzner, declined to comment.
Carbon traders are also worried.
"The European Commission seems to be going back to the bad old days," said Henry Derwent, president of the International Emissions Trading Association (IETA). "We have a creeping re-ascendency of command and control in a part of the world economy that once prided itself on being market oriented," he added.
The problem was initially foreseen by the Commission's climate team, under climate commissioner Connie Hedegaard, in a strategy paper in February.
But her proposal to balance out the problem by setting aside the excess permits was attacked by some of her colleagues, who sought to protect industry from high carbon prices.
EU carbon market experts were divided over whether the dispute had arisen from clumsy policy-making, or if energy commissioner Guenther Oettinger in fact aimed to curb the role of the ETS....
They have already said security against organized crime theft cannot begin to be addressed until at least 2013 when a centralized system is expected:
1/27/11, "European commission extends carbon market freeze indefinitely," UK Guardian, Leigh Phillips
"Once there is a centralised clearinghouse, starting in 2013, (European Commission climate spokesperson) Kokkonen said these sort of problems will no longer be an issue:
"We have to survive till 2013.""
-------------------------------------------------------
2/1/11, ""Broken" EU spot CO2 market will struggle to revive," Reuters, Chestney
"It's an absolute disaster for the spot market," said Louis Redshaw, head of environmental markets at Barclays Capital.
"We're at the point now where the market is essentially broken.
- You can't fix it with security alone."...
Liability rules differ across countries and are yet to be tested. In theory, Britain and Germany, for example, have opposite laws, where the seller and buyer respectively get legal ownership of stolen permits. "The spot market will not be the same. The serious question of legal liability may mean the spot market remains all but dead," Andrew Ager, head of emissions trading at Bache Commodities, told Reuters."...
----------------------------------
In plain English from George Soros:
12/4/09,"Carbon Capitalists warming to climate market using derivatives" Bloomberg News
"George Soros, the billionaire hedge fund operator, says money managers would find ways to manipulate cap-and-trade markets. “The system can be gamed,” Soros, 79, remarked.... “That’s why financial types like me like it --
because there are financial opportunities.""...
-------------------------------
"
A victim of a famine machine that is entirely man-made...by greens."...
12/28/10, "
...Fresno, Calif., stands as the de facto capital of California's mighty Central Valley, the
breadbasket of America." But
----------------------------------
2/21/11, "Green economy needs 2% of every nation's income, says UN," UK Guardian, Fiona Harvey
==============================
7/16/10, "Carbon Trading Used as Money-Laundering Front," Jakarta Globe
===========================
10/8/10, "Murder on the Carbon Express: Interpol Takes On Emissions Fraud," Mother Jones, M. Schapiro
==============================
11/14/10, "
Climate policy distributes the world's new wealth," NZZ, am Sonntag, German press, interview with former
co-chair of the UN IPCC Ottmar Edenhofer" a German economist.
===========================
UN environmental consultant says fraud in UN carbon trading can't be fixed, is interwoven in too many public and private sector jobs including the World Bank and the UN. And, "there is
- nobody in that world that is critical of the process because they are all making their living off it.”"...
10/12/10, "A carbon trading system draws environmental skeptics," New York Times,
Patricia Brett
------------------------------------
12/1/10, "EU Carbon permits missing from registry due to (computer) virus," Reuters, Nina Chestney
"
One million European carbon permits (valued at $19.54 million US) have gone missing from the Romanian subsidiary of cement company Holcim's (
HOLN.VX) emissions registry account due to a computer virus,
- the EU Commission said on Wednesday."...
===========================
Christian Science Monitor, 4/20/10, "Buying Carbon offsets may ease eco-guilt but not global warming," by Doug Struck.
==============================
Bloomberg News, 12/4/09,"Carbon Capitalists warming to climate market using derivatives"
--------------------------
You can get people to believe in anything. Most people in Egypt believe adulterers should be stoned to death. ed.
via Climate Depot
Administrator Lisa Jackson was spotted in Nairobi, Kenya for the 26th session of the governing council of the United Nations Environment Programme. During the session, a new report was released titled, "Towards a Green Economy" that suggested that investing in green technologies could spur growth around the globe." getty photo
But keep remembering this, folks:
According to American liberals,
and if you disagree you're a transsexual homophobe furry..."
--------------------------
There has been a denial of reality within our government for a long time. G.W. (Bush) reinforced it with his cozying up to Islam. It is ridiculous and will continue to get more people killed, eventually a lot more. You'd think that 9-11 would have taught a valuable lesson about that, but it was never properly taken by our government. They continue to coddle extremist Islamists and allow Islam to gain ground in this country.
-------------------------
Its a shame that we are so politicially correct that we can't call Islam what it is - evil. Evil can not be negotiated with. Why the U.S. -- and Europe -- are coddling these 5th century throwbacks is beyond me. Why are they here -- according to their own Quran, they're here to spread Islam throughout the world and take over. It is what it is."
-----------------------
MIKE...you need to understand that islam is NOT a religion and by it's very tenets will never go thru any sort of reformation. It is a totalitarian brutal geopolitcal movement that some argue is actually a form of satan worship. And you can see the point of those that argue that as it's "god" calls for murder, rape, slavery, lying, destruction, mutilation, pedophaelia and it prohibits all that is good about mankind...peace, love, tolerance, art, music, creativity and in fact does it's best to make sure that joy is wiped off the face of the earth. It is what it is and to expect anything different is to be foolhardy."
---------------------
Why is it not sinking in to westerners, especially its present effete leaders that devout followers of Islam have a totally different mindset that cannot co-exist with ours except temporarily through trickery? The pretense that the mythical "moderate Muslim" is qualitatively different from those who sacrifice children as bomb carriers is suicidal denial on our part.
Excitable Muslims have no difficulty getting thousands into the street to protest cartoons of Mohammed, paranoid fantasies about ice cream swirls disrespecting Allah etc. Where are the Muslim demonstrations against their co-religionists' disgusting behavior? There are none because MUSLIMS ARE NOT DISGUSTED. Not only do they accept the cleansing of all Muslim nations of non-Muslims with sang froid and the killing of 500,000 blacks in Sudan by Muslim militias, they have nothing to say to terrorists who kill far more Muslims than non-Muslims. They may as well be from another planet for all their understanding of human decency. They are in fact from a past primitive era, 8th century troglodytes lumbering around the 21st century with bloodthirsty supremacist notions. In the West, it's been "Women and children first".