The Children's Book That Has Global Warming Deniers Up in Arms

Posted September 19, 2007 | 10:43 AM (EST)



stumbleupon :The Children's Book That Has Global Warming Deniers Up in Arms   digg: The Children's Book That Has Global Warming Deniers Up in Arms   reddit: The Children's Book That Has Global Warming Deniers Up in Arms   del.icio.us: The Children's Book That Has Global Warming Deniers Up in Arms

A global warming denier group is attacking The Down To Earth Guide to Global Warming, the new children's book I co-authored with Cami Gordon.

Our crime? It turns out one of the illustrations in the book was accidentally mislabeled. This has got the gang at the at the Science and Public Policy Instituted up in arms - or at least pretending to be -- no doubt hoping to ride our coattails, create some controversy, and promote their own new book.

Why am I not surprised? These "skeptics" have grown so predictable.

Even so, I'd like to thank the SPPI for pointing out this minor error to us. However, we have checked with climate experts who confirmed that the text accompanying the mislabeled illustration, and our description of the close relationship between CO2 and temperature, is accurate and fairly represents the current state of scientific knowledge.

Apparently the climate change "skeptics" have grown so desperate in their attempts to hide the truth from the American people that they've taken to spending hours scrutinizing a children's book, trying to marginalize the urgent information it contains about global warming. And through all their efforts, all they uncovered in a hundred pages was a single mislabeled illustration -- an illustration accompanied by accurate text. Now they've launched a full 'report' attempting to discredit the entire book, even though they can't find anything wrong with it besides the flipping of two colors on a solitary illustration.

So thanks guys! We will correct the illustration in the next edition. We're happy to learn that that was the only question SPPI had about the entire fact-filled book! The Down To Earth Guide translates complex scientific facts about global warming into language that is easily understood by kids.

I hope children of all ages read this book because, ultimately -- and unfortunately -- global warming is the grim legacy we are passing on to them.

stopglobalwarming.org

Comments for this post are now closed

 

Comments
160
Pending Comments
0

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

Hint sample
View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 Next › Last » (5 pages total)

Anyone remember the Lorax by Dr Seuss?

When that came out the right wingers and timber industry were up in arms - got it banned from many a school library. Even today it is not as easily found or readily available as other more well known Seuss books.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 06:17 PM on 10/01/2007

Erasthanes (spelling?) figured the round earth had a circumference of 25,000 miles. When? Fifth century BC.
It took the dumb Middle Age Europeans to "figure out" that the earth was flat!
Global warming? Is there still a question?

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 06:13 PM on 09/25/2007

I do not denie that the climate is changing. I do question whether our contribution of 0.012% of CO2 to the atmosphere is the culprit as opposed to, I don't know, that nuclear reactor at the middle of the solar system that is 1 million times the size of earth. It is ironic to see liberals dismiss people who believe in God because the just blindly follow a book, but they themselves quickly fall to worship a computer model. The IPCC has 53 climate scientists while the remaining 2447 are from other fields. The report was made by the climate scientists creating a model and then taking the results of this program (that is somehow supposed to track and predict cycles in the most complicated system of the planet)to these other scientists. They go to a polar baer expert and ask "What if this happened?" and then that scientist reports what would happen if it warmed X degree's. The majority of the IPCC report is based on "what if?" questions produced by a computer.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:33 AM on 09/22/2007

Looks like a lot of people just don't want to admit there is any problem with our air, water,climate etc. because if they did they might have to take some responsibility and alter their lifestyles. Whatever you believe, the air is definitely filthy and lots of us can't breathe very well. Either we clean up or face a future of living in filth and squalor. Or maybe you all just want to do nothing and wait around to see what happens.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 01:17 AM on 09/21/2007

I see the climate denier trolls are out in full force, as usual with any articles on Global Warming.

They must be paid by the fossil fuel industries to spend all day scanning the internet for articles to put down, attempting to confuse the issue as much as possible. Otherwise, who would have that much time to spend making sure to post right at first?

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:19 AM on 09/21/2007

The stages of global warming denialism.

1.) The world isn't getting warmer.

2.) Even if it is, humans have nothing to do with it. It is a natural process.

3.) Even if humans do contribute, it is insignificant.

4.) Even if the human contribution is significant, the consequences will be benign.

5.) Even if the consequences are not so benign, there is nothing we can do about it.

6.) Even if there are things we can do, I reserve my inalienable right to keep my head firmly planted in my ass.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 08:02 PM on 09/20/2007

quote"So thanks guys! We will correct the illustration in the next edition."

omg you kill me you know that?!!? lmao
and i love the "wherever books are sold" line too.... lookin' forward to the next "edition" and possibly another book as well :-p

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 06:04 PM on 09/20/2007

There aren't really any serious "global warming skeptics." People generally accept the fact that the earth is going through a warming phase. As ... points out, the only real debate is..

- why is global warming occurring
- and what are the consequences of global warming

Nonetheless, there are three things we can do to curb the number of global warming skeptics...

1. Take the UN out of the equation. The UN is seen by many as anti-America and - especially - anti-Isreal. Any solution offered by the UN will be summarily rejected by 30% of Americans, solely because it comes from the UN. Disband the IPCC and reallocate its resources.

2. Make sure research grants are awarded in such a way that there are no 'benefits' for coming up with specific outcomes. Peer-reviewed journal articles need to disclose who funded the research or it should not be accepted/published.

3. Get governments out of the way of real innovation. There is time, so let's let market forces and 'mother necessity' do their magic and let technology solve the problem. In 30 years, we'll can all be driving 0-emmision cars - but only if we don't put the US Auto industry out of business.

4. Any predictive model with an R2 of less than .5 should never be cited.

5. Cut down on the hysteria and rhetoric. Stop the blatant hypocrisy of people like Al Gore and Laurie David. Don't pollute, don't burn fossil fuels - people get it. Until all Hollywood-types stop flying private jets and move into 1000 sq-ft homes, do not lecture average Americans on what kind of car they drive. The holier-than-thou stuff turns people off.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:43 AM on 09/20/2007

I'm definitely in favor of separation of church and state.

And I don't think one of the priests from the church of climatology should be allowed anymore access to our public school children then christian fundamentalists.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 09:47 AM on 09/20/2007

Thanks Laurie! I want to see every global warming denier called out and embarrassed in this fashion. Excellent job!

Larry Nocella
http://www.LarryNocella.com/
author of the novel, Where Did This Come From?

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 08:13 AM on 09/20/2007

Yes! Let's call out and embarrass all those people who have a difference of OPINION! Let's not RESPECT or ENGENDER a thoughtful debate about anything!

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 06:05 PM on 09/20/2007

jaybone23
Certainly in a fair, genuine, thoughtful debate, sneaky underhand and other tricks and tactics are completely inappropriate.

However, with science-based subjects like Global Warming, since the peer-reviewed, ISI Journal published scientific evidence for GW is unequivocal and:

Quote [explanatory figures between "|"]
The understanding of anthropogenic warming and cooling influences on climate has improved since the TAR, leading to very high confidence |90%| that the global average net effect of human activities since 1750 has been one of warming, with a radiative forcing of +1.6 [+0.6 to +2.4] W m"2 (see Figure SPM.2). {2.3., 6.5, 2.9}
End quote

From: A report of Working Group I of the 'Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change' -
'Summary for Policymakers'
Page 3, Orange panel.
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/AR4WG1_Pub_SPM-v2.pdf

However, the deniers are disinterested in genuine debate, because it's based upon science, and the deniers will therefore inexorably lose the argument, because they never have had any genuine science.

Consequently, the deniers resort instead to undermining or derailing debate with fallacious arguments, lies, deceit, spin, disinformation, propaganda and other underhand tactics. In a desperate attempt to confuse and bewilder the general public.

Therefore, 'the gloves are off'!

Genuine debate based-upon peer-reviewed & ISI Journal published science is always welcome! Whatever it says! We are interested in scientific evidence, but that excludes pseudo-science and so-called 'science' published in the Wall Street Journal, NewsWeek, Time and Energy & Environment!

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 03:04 AM on 09/22/2007

Because this is a moral crusade, right Lar?

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:58 AM on 09/20/2007

De Nile is a river in Africa.
You call us who are skeptical of human-caused global warming "deniers" but that term just highlights your inability to deal with this subject in a meaningful way.

There is nothing for me to be embarrassed about. What would be embarrassing is if I were to accept the swill of AGW and join a campaign to fight it. It's not scientific, it's un-American and it's a devotion to living a lie. I will never join this propagandistic parade.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:41 AM on 09/20/2007

From your comment that the campaign against global warming is "un-American" it is plausible to conclude that your primary values are those promoted by Corporate America: laissez-faire capitalism, and of course all that follows from it -- destruction of the environment in general, escalating extinction of species, serious exploitation of resource-rich foreign countries, and, ultimately, a Third-World type oligarchy here at home.

Why not just come right out and say it: the bottom line on The Corporation's quarterly report is the only thing that counts in your world.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 01:19 PM on 09/20/2007

To TheFollower-
Your accusation about my position being just for Corporate greed is a pure cop-out because you cannot propose a reasonable argument against what I say.
In contrast to your claim, I believe that any corporate activity that works directly for the furtherance of its own sake at the expense of human or natural welfare should be shut down immediately and those responsible held legally accountable for their irresponsibility.

Global warming is a fact, but human causality of it is the HOAX.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 04:54 AM on 10/02/2007
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 Next › Last » (5 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in


 
 
Bloggers Index›
Read All Posts by
Laurie David›
 

 Site  Web ask.com