Scientists offered cash to dispute climate study and research and media censored

What is this? Schools closed again - what do they expect working families to do? Children at home again today. Yes of course safety is an issue but you have to wonder - the roads are clear (even all the little roads here), buses are running, people are going to work - yes snow is forecast for later but other countries more than manage.

Clearly one issue here is that people now travel ever further to take children to school - supposedly it is all about choice but don't get me on that one - in most cases locally, we should see local schools for local children - yet what we have is too many children being driven several miles to schools rather than going to the nearest one.....

Anyhow one item that I have been meaning to cover in this blog is the news from a week ago that scientists and economists have been offered $10,000 each by a lobby group funded by one of the world's largest oil companies to undermine the IPCC climate change report - the news came to light on the same day as ExxonMobil announced record profits of $39 billion reports - yes that is $39 billion!!

The American Enterprise Institute (AEI) with close links to the Bush administration, received more than $1.6 million in funding from ExxonMobil. It is reported in the papers that this was a clear attempt to cast doubt over climate change despite the evidence being overwhelming. The IPCC report (see blog for 5th February) is likely to be the most respected scientific guide to climate change ever published. It will form the foundation of any international agreements around a successor to Kyoto - it is perhaps understanding why they wanted to influence it?

Hot on the heels of this expose, a new document has now accused the Bush administration of deliberately censoring work by climate scientists. A report, published by the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) and the Government Accountability Project (GAP), was based on questionnaire data received from over three hundred scientists. Over one third (37 per cent) of those who responded had experienced statements by officials at their agencies that had misrepresented their findings, and 43 percent ‘perceived or personally experienced’ changes or edits during review that changed the meaning of scientific findings.

Nearly half of all the scientists (46 per cent) said that they had come under pressure to remove the terms ‘climate change’ or ‘global warming’ from their documents!

Dr. Francesca Grifo, Director of the UCS Scientific Integrity Program, commented: "Every day that the government stifles climate science is a day we fail to protect future generations and our planet from the consequences of global warming. We need reforms that affirm the right of scientists to fully communicate their research and to blow the whistle when important science is suppressed."

In many ways all this uncovering is good news - and proof of what we have suspected for years - indeed as long ago as 2001 I was joining Greens in Gloucestershire to protest outside Esso garages - see here - as Esso, part of ExxonMobil, were strongly denying climate change existed - even then people were saying they were up to no good. Clearly this is another case of big business interfering to maximise profit - 'interfering' what am I saying - they are putting the whole planet at risk with their actions - it does make you wonder who is running these companies.

And as for the media?

Perhaps more worrying is how the media report all this - yes some have covered the stories about ExxonMobil but it is worth taking a closer look. Medialens have just produced their latest essay on this topic - they looked at how the papers covered the release of the IPCC report. See "In the Spirit of Nero" on their website.

On February 3, the Independent noted that the latest scientific assessment by the IPCC provides “humanity's loudest warning yet of the catastrophe that is threatening to overtake us” while The Guardian said “No more excuses”. Medialens write:

"The irony is bitter indeed. While the Guardian’s front page was packed with doom-laden warnings, the centre spread consisted of a two-page, full-colour advert for Renault cars: “Everything is sport.” For good measure, the cover story of the Travel supplement promoted holidays to New York.

"A classic double-page was also to be found at the heart of the Independent: graphs of perilously rising temperatures, text explaining the catastrophic impacts, photographs of climate-related disasters around the world. And also, bottom left on the same page, a large advert for Halfords "car essentials" and, bottom right, an American Airlines advert for reduced-fare flights (just £199!) to New York (You can see pages 4-5 here). The rest of the Independent – like all other newspapers - was crammed with the usual inducements to indulge in unrestrained consumerism: Renault, Audi and Hyundai cars, a multitude of hotel breaks, hi-tech electronic gadgets, credit card loans, furniture and yet more ‘cheap’ flights.

"The message? We’re rapidly heading for disaster and must take decisive action now. Meanwhile, we must continue accelerating along the same path that is the cause of this disaster. Never has the structural conflict of interest at the very heart of the corporate media been more painfully exposed."

"The cover story of the Independent on Sunday’s Review supplement the following day (February 4) was almost beyond belief. The words on the cover ran:"Time is running out... Ski resorts are melting... Paradise islands are vanishing... So what are you waiting for? "30 places you need to visit while you still can - A 64-page Travel Special..." (You can see the cover here).

Let us not forget the Independent is one of the better papers when it comes to raising the issue of climate change - but it still fails catastrophically when it comes to what needs to be done. Indeed it is perhaps no wonder that there is so much misunderstanding around. The paper calls for ‘greener’ economic growth to save the planet and says “The problem is not one of information, but action.” Medialens comment:

"Where are the discussions about the corporate stranglehold on economics, politics, culture and society? About the fanatical, age-old Western determination to control global resources and markets? About the West’s repeated crushing of regional self-development in Latin America, southeast Asia and elsewhere? About the psychopathic corporate imperative to yield, at any cost, shareholder dividends for rich investors? And about the patently unsustainable business model of endless economic ‘growth’?....none of this is up for serious discussion - even as the planet teeters on the brink of the greatest mass extinction since the end of the Permian era, 251 million years ago - is actually no surprise at all."

The essay has more of interest including suggestions for emails to send to key journalists and editors. It is a serious problem that these issues are just not getting the discussion they need.