Lunch, With a Side of Climate Denial

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.


You might think the recent exoneration of the scientists involved in the so-called “Climategate” scandal would have put a damper on efforts by climate change deniers to exploit the issue. But the leaders of the anti-science movement were still at it on Friday, as the Heritage Foundation and the Competitive Enterprise Institute hosted a lunch briefing on Capitol Hill to continue playing up the “controversy.”

“The Climategate Scandals: What Has Been Revealed And What Does It Mean?” featured Cato’s Pat Michaels and John D’Aleo, a meteorologist who runs the skeptic outlet ICECAP. It also featured Chick-Fil-A catering, which seemed to be the chief draw for many of the young House staffers in the audience.

 

The briefing was a rehashing of many tired points: other climate scientists are mean to climate skeptics; the world is not actually getting warmer; but if it was, the problem isn’t burning fossil fuels, it’s the sun, water vapor, or volcanoes; satellite temperature readings are more reliable than surface temperature readings; there are many scientists who disagree with the consensus on climate change but are just too scared to speak up.

The panelists spent a lot of time on “Climategate,” arguing that the incident proves that global warming is “a catastrophe that never was,” as Heritage senior policy analyst Ben Lieberman put it. Of course, he noted that he was already a skeptic well before the emails were leaked: “I’ve been a fairly hardnosed skeptic for years. After Climategate I realized I wasn’t skeptical enough.”

Since the panelists spent a lot of time complaining about how the investigations into “Climategate” were just “whitewash,” I asked Michaels what they would accept as an objective examination of the emails. His response? Nothing could ever satisfy the skeptics. “I don’t think the can of worms can be unloaded,” said Michaels. “It’s just not going to happen.”

He said it would be difficult “to find someone with expertise on this” who is a “purely objective person.” He also took the opportunity to subtly downplay his industry ties, and portray scientists funded by grants and universities as equally biased. “How can you have expertise and not be supported in some way?” he said. “That makes this a difficult situation.”

So, the skeptics will never be satisfied, nor will they abandon their flogging of the emails as the smoking gun proving that climate change is a giant conspiracy. (Never mind that the emails didn’t put a dent in the vast body of scientific evidence on climate change.)

The event itself was a case study in how these guys manage to keep this non-issue alive. Discover‘s Sheril Kirshenbaum has an excellent post up about their strategy and why it works (hint: the Chick-Fil-A is part of it). In any case, don’t expect the skeptics to give up on Climategate any time soon. Heritage and CEI are planning another event on the matter for June 17.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest