David Suzuki and Scientific and Social Responsibility.
“It occurred to me….” Texting gives a new meaning to the phrase twiddling your thumbs.
David Suzuki wants to jail politicians who ignore climate science. What he really wants is to jail those who don’t accept his interpretation of climate science. It’s a mentality he applies to all the environmental sciences and is part of “the science is settled” mantra. Why not jail scientists who don’t understand climate science but want to jail politicians who want all the facts before making a decision. A plethora of misinformation has been used to force unwarranted actions by poorly informed politicians.
How many lives have been disrupted or destroyed by job loss, business closure, industry closings, cost of living increases, health damaged by stress over threat of impending doom, guilt exploited about destroying nature or killing animals, conflict with friend family friends and neighbours because they dared to suggest most environmentalist’s claims were false. Those who claim the title of environmentalist have taken the moral high ground and used what should be a good paradigm, environmentalism, for a political agenda. Suzuki’s political agenda was confirmed when he resigned from his own Foundation, whose tax status requires it be non-political.
Here are quotes from people influential in the political exploitation.
“It doesn’t matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true.”
— Paul Watson, co-founder of Greenpeace.
“We have to offer up scary scenarios… each of us has to decide the right balance between being effective and being honest.”
— Stephen Schneider, IPCC author.
“Isn’t the only hope for this planet the total collapse of industrial civilisation? Is it not our responsibility to ensure that this collapse happens?’”
–Maurice Strong, UNEP Director.
“We’ve got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing …”
— Senator Tim Wirth, 1993 (now President of the United Nations Foundation and Better World Fund).
“No matter if the science of global warming is all phony… climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.”
— C. Stewart, Canadian Minister of the Environment.
Would Suzuki condemn a scientist who misrepresents or ignores old or new information that changes the original claim? Would he condemn a scientist who deliberately targeted children with limited, unsubstantiated speculation as fact? Would he condemn a scientist if new information contradicted his public pronouncements? As John Maynard Keynes said,
“If the facts change, I’ll change my opinion. What do you do, Sir”
On February 1, 2007 Suzuki crossed Canada in an orchestrated campaign to scare people about environmental issues, especially extinction of species. He claimed,
“It’s either total destruction of the economy, or spend one per cent of the GDP to bring our emissions down.”
The problem is Tom Wigley, senior scientist involved in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said complete implementation of the original Kyoto would only reduce temperatures by 0.05 by 2050.
In the cross-country trip Suzuki claimed the demise of 3 species an hour. He didn’t name one and the link to the topic on his web site is broken. Search his site for “Extinction” and you get pages of “on the verge of extinction” stories. It is also estimated of those claimed extinct one-third are later found. His claim of 3 is likely derived from E.O Wilson, an honorary Board member of the Suzuki Foundation 2003 Annual Report.
Wilson’s idea of extinction is based on false assumptions and mathematical estimates.
“A good proxy for the rate of extinction is the rate of growth in energy used by the human population. In other words, extinction rates are increasing in step with the product of population growth times the growth in affluence.”
The trouble is it isn’t happening.
Wilson’s extinction claim was 27,000 per year, or 3 per hour. He also predicted 22 percent of all species will be extinct by 2022.
Can Wilson or Suzuki identify any extinctions in the last 10 years? During that time over a million new species were discovered and that’s only part of what remains. Here’s why.
“Furthermore, the study, published by PLoS Biology, says a staggering 86% of all species on land and 91% of those in the seas have yet to be discovered, described and catalogued.”
Here are some examples of discoveries.
The headline says,
“One million New Plankton Species Found.”
Leader Dr Bowler said,
“It’s the first time that anyone’s done this expedition looking specifically for plankton life, and that’s why we found so many,”
Some will say these are miniscule creatures and therefore the number is not impressive, however, many very large animals are regularly discovered as illustrated.
2005 report headlined, “Scientists have discovered a new monkey species in the mountains of East Africa.”
2007 report the headline was, “New Animal And Plant Species Found In Vietnam”
2010 report said, “30 unknown species found in Ecuador’s highland forests by a t2005 reporteam of U.S. and Ecuadorian researchers,”
2010 report said “Over 200 New Species Found In Papua New Guinea.” The lead scientist said, there are,
“large areas of New Guinea that are pretty much unexplored biologically.
2012 report headline said, “New species of monkey identified in Africa”
Suzuki has presented incorrect, inadequate, and out of context information to scare people and force destructive action. Instead of jail his sentence should be to traverse Canada and provide accurate up to date information and answer questions from all those who have been negatively affected by his religiously cynical campaign. Like so many of these exploiters of the environment, such as Al Gore, he won’t debate and has controlled who and what can be asked. He stormed out of a Toronto radio interview when interviewer, John Oakley, made the totally accurate observation that global warming is not a “totally settled issue.” In Edmonton while promoting a self-promotion movie in the schools he preselected a student and gave him the question to ‘ask’. In Ottawa, when a person asked a question he didn’t like he had the microphone shut off. Yes, David, we all care about the environment, but most of us prefer the entire story and resent those who exploit it for a political agenda.