August 06, 2019

Tom Harris: Newspapers print climate change hysteria for ad revenue

Sheila Gunn ReidRebel Host | The Gunn Show

On the latest episode of The Gunn Show, Tom Harris joined me to talk about why the press is willing to update the climate change countdown from 12 years to 18 months.

Harris, Executive Director of the International Climate Science Coalition, talked about how the mainstream media thrives on negative news.

Sponsors don't want their ads to show up in a magazine or paper when there's a climate change meltdown happening in one column with a more measured response appearing in the next.

Comments
You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2019-08-09 14:27:50 -0400
Liza Rosie your assertion that changing the economic development model is the same thing as saying changing the economic system is false. Economic development is a branch of economics which deals with economic aspects of the development process in low income countries, for example: Infrastructure, Education, Health & Wellness, Labor Rights, Fair Competition, etc…

An economic system is a system of production, resource allocation and distribution of goods and services within a society or a given geographic area, for example: Capitalism, Communism, Distributism, Feudalism, Socialism, etc…

By adding [capitalist] to a quote by Christina Figueres, Mr. Bells implies her intention is to change the capitalist system rather that economic development model. Mr. Bells misquotes Christina Figueres.
commented 2019-08-09 13:48:04 -0400
Bells is the author of the article I left the link for. Neither I or Bells misquoted anyone, catch up.
commented 2019-08-09 13:45:46 -0400
Changing THE economic development model is the same thing as saying changing the economic system we have been using for the past 150 years. The one that pays for stuff, the economy. What, do you work for Butts? Your semantics are stupid. Now go take yourself around the Alinsky rule maypole one more time and dive down that rabbit hole all by yourself. Make your next comment a good one. I won’t be reading it so hit hard and have fun.

U.N. climate chief Christina Figueres said that the 2014 Paris climate conference agenda was “to change the [capitalist] economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution.”

Your subjective description of the very objective meaning of the words of the UN Chief is a game. Its spin 101.
commented 2019-08-09 12:56:21 -0400
Liza Rosie, you write, “Bells addition of capitalism is appropriate since that it the only economic model that produces wealth to pillage.” Who is “Bells?” Why would misquoting Christina Figueres be ok because the “addition of capitalism is appropriate since that it the only economic model that produces wealth to pillage?”

Christina Figueres was talking about an economic development model not a economy system.
commented 2019-08-09 11:46:09 -0400
DAVE JAMES commented 1 day ago
Liza Rosie, You misquote Christina Figueres. By adding [capitalist] to her words you imply her intention is to change the capitalist system rather that economic development model. “to change the [capitalist] economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution.”

Carbon pricing is a good example of changing the economic development model using the capitalist system. A carbon price provides an economic signal to emitters, and allows them to decide to either transform their activities and lower their emissions, or continue emitting and paying for their emissions. Market forces reduce emissions.
-———————————————————————————————————————————————-
Bells addition of capitalism is appropriate since that it the only economic model that produces wealth to pillage. By the by, Gerald Butts has told Canadians to their faces that the plan for Canada IS a new economy.
I get that you don’t think there is a thing wrong with it. You have made that pretty clear and your words speak for themselves. There are not many days left in the life of this nasty fib.
commented 2019-08-09 11:37:09 -0400
by Larry Bell

Excerpt: https://www.climatedepot.com/2017/05/24/global-warming-is-not-about-the-science-un-admits-climate-change-policy-is-about-how-we-redistribute-the-worlds-wealth/

Ottmar Edenhofer, lead author of the IPCC’s fourth summary report released in 2007 candidly expressed the priority. Speaking in 2010, he advised, “One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. Instead, climate change policy is about how we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth.”

Or, as U.N. climate chief Christina Figueres pointedly remarked, the true aim of the U.N.’s 2014 Paris climate conference was “to change the [capitalist] economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution.”
commented 2019-08-09 11:35:53 -0400
“All your second post does is confirm you’re not someone who wants to be taken seriously.”
Dave James, all your posts confirm is that you are someone who can’t be taken seriously.
“oh you’re so rude,I can’t even!”
…and extreme environuts ARE anti human. From their elitist perch they remind us everyday that we need to be quelled, controlled, herded and even done away with all for the sake of ‘mother earth’.

I didn’t misquote anyone, I copied and pasted a paragraph from an article I supplied a link for, quoting the UN chief who said plainly, that they just used the man made climate change lie to gain traction with gullible, lazy and stupid people to further their agenda of a corporate global government, for power and pillaging our money. Societal control. Its all about control.

There is a lot we could be doing to clean up our environment, but these power hungry extremists are wasting all our time and money on a lie.
Subterfuge, all of it.
commented 2019-08-09 09:16:55 -0400
C’mon there little DAVE.

Take your spankings like a man.
commented 2019-08-08 15:31:28 -0400
Like Jamie MacMaster, Tom Harris often resorts to irrational personal attacks because he does not have a convincing rational argument.

For example: Mr. Harris claims “extremists” have “hi jacked” professional and scientific societies like Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of Alberta, Canada (APEGA), American Physical Society (APS), the American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE), etc… because they all accept the scientific evidence of human caused climate change.

Mr. Harris asserts they are a “cult” which promotes an “anti-human, anti-environment agenda appear to suffer emotional and psychological problems which they seem to deal with by attempting to make others miserable.” https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/sciences-untold-scandal-the-lockstep-march-of-professional-societies-to-promote-the-climate-change-scare/

In another op-ed, Mr. Harris argues the people who accept the scientific evidence of human caused climate change “…apparently want people to believe that it is naturally a no-risk world. They want people to accept that the risk exists only because of human activity.” (Source, “Time to rethink disasters” by Dr. Tim Ball & Tom Harris, Oct 11, 2018, Times and Democrat)

However this is a straw-man fallacy. No one claims “it is naturally a no risk world.”

Mr. Harris and Dr. Ball use this false argument to label those people accepted the evidence of man-made climate change as “illogical” and having “…a the deep-rooted anti-human belief at the core…”

and there is this: https://pjmedia.com/trending/extreme-environmentalists-are-anti-human/
commented 2019-08-08 13:40:55 -0400
Let’s see now….on the subject of childishness.

Little DAVE JAMES is so touchy that he responded like an overly-sensitive little girl to a blatantly provocative comment that wasn’t even directed at him.
commented 2019-08-08 11:11:11 -0400
Jamie MacMaster, No need to confirm your supreme indifference. Your child-like name-calling made that clear in your first post.

Open and honest debate is not important to everyone.
commented 2019-08-08 08:00:10 -0400
It is a matter of supreme indifference to me whether you take me seriously or not, DAVE JAMES.

However, you obviously do, because you can’t resist coming back.
commented 2019-08-07 18:31:05 -0400
Jamie MacMaster, Rather than address my actual arguments or apologize for your child-like insults, you double down on personal attacks. All your second post does is confirm you’re not someone who wants to be taken seriously.
commented 2019-08-07 16:01:12 -0400
“Calling the people you disagree with “parasites and fools” is childish name-calling. "

Wrong. It was a Rorschach test I designed to weed out parasites and fools.

BTW, how do you think you did?
commented 2019-08-07 15:48:19 -0400
Jamie MacMaster, the scientific evidence of human-caused climate change is both robust and compelling. https://changingclimate.ca/CCCR2019/chapter/2-0/

Calling the people you disagree with “parasites and fools” is childish name-calling.
commented 2019-08-07 15:44:19 -0400
There are two types of people beating the apocalyptic climate change drum: parasites, and fools. It is a tick/host arrangement.
commented 2019-08-07 15:24:49 -0400
Liza Rosie, You misquote Christina Figueres. By adding [capitalist] to her words you imply her intention is to change the capitalist system rather that economic development model. “to change the [capitalist] economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution.”

Carbon pricing is a good example of changing the economic development model using the capitalist system. A carbon price provides an economic signal to emitters, and allows them to decide to either transform their activities and lower their emissions, or continue emitting and paying for their emissions. Market forces reduce emissions.
commented 2019-08-07 15:11:53 -0400
Liza Rosie, “FYI Strong and Gore are two sides of the same coin… Harris isn’t wrong to connect the two” but Tom Harris’ false conspiracy theories don’t link the two. Mr. Harris posits two mutually exclusive conspiracies. If Maurice Strong created the “myth” of “man-made carbon dioxide causing global warming,” then Al Gore cannot be responsible for “dangerous mythology of dangerous manmade global warming” and vice versa.

Mr. Harris credibility is base on the accuracy of his op eds, not what I write. For example: Tom Harris’ & op-ed “Media Hysteria: Climate Change ‘Heat Records’ Are a Huge Data Manipulation” was recently retracted by the Western Journal “…for failing to meet The Western Journal’s Editorial Standards. After publication, a number of factual claims made in the Op-Ed were determined to have been untrue.” https://www.westernjournal.com/media-hysteria-climate-change-heat-records-huge-data-manipulation/
commented 2019-08-07 13:35:56 -0400
FYI Strong and Gore are two sides of the same coin. Deceased Strong had been laying the ground work for this nonsense for decades. Gore brought the vehicle (man made climate change accusation) to the general public via his movie. He was basically an actor with an agenda. He had to get his nuts and bolts of the scheme from somewhere. Harris isn’t wrong to connect the two. The only difference is I think Strong’s entire ideology was a religion to him, Gore is just an opportunist and a hypocrite.

It doesn’t even matter, never mind not being the point. Harris isn’t the only one who knows the truth. Trying to discredit him does what exactly? He is but one messenger. The point is, the entire thing is a hoax to force behavioural changes, make the populace accept controls and pay for the privilege.
Now, carry on.
commented 2019-08-07 13:22:45 -0400
Dave James, well that sure puts me in my place! About the UN admitting its a ruse? No comment on that? I provided a link so my comment could be understood in context, yet you disregard it because I use unflattering names for climate alarmists. If the climate ‘mads’ couldn’t use a well deserved descriptive to get out of addressing a point they don’t like, they would and do find other reasons to obfuscate.

U.N. climate chief Christina Figueres says its not really about climate. Link below.

(Andrew we actually agree that Gore is a huckster ;0)

Have fun boys. Carry on.
commented 2019-08-07 12:22:54 -0400
Andrew Stephenson, Your unsupported assertion on Tom Harris’ and Al Gore’s are less than convincing and beside the point.

I’m a critic of Mr. Harris false and misleading op-eds but to posit he is writing them to make a name for himself or make tons of money defies commonsense.

The fact the Earth is warming is supported by multiple global temperature data sets. Attempting to mitigate and adapt to climate change caused by the warming means we need to understand the probable outcome of current and future policies.
commented 2019-08-07 11:53:55 -0400
How does “wealth redistribution” work in Canada, which stands to profit immensely from green energy (containing both tremendous potential renewable energy sources, as well as the minerals needed to built machines to exploit them), if we actually put any effort into it?

I posit that Tom Harris and Al Gore are basically the same sort of huckster, making names and profit for themselves based upon hysterical misinterpretations of the data, data, which, overall, is concerning to its core. I do agree that it’s silly to put a defined timeline on probabilistic models.
commented 2019-08-07 11:50:24 -0400
Quoting Mr. Tom Harris and providing the source of the quotes so they can be read in context is not “bullshit” but rational debate. It is Mr. Harris’ words which impact his credibility, not mine.

“You people are pathetic cult freaks.” Name-calling is not the sign of a carefully considered post.
commented 2019-08-07 11:43:57 -0400
https://www.climatedepot.com/2017/05/24/global-warming-is-not-about-the-science-un-admits-climate-change-policy-is-about-how-we-redistribute-the-worlds-wealth/

“Instead, climate change policy is about how we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth.” Or, as U.N. climate chief Christina Figueres pointedly remarked, the true aim of the U.N.’s 2014 Paris climate conference was “to change the [capitalist] economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution.”

Wealth redistribution and societal control, they say so themselves.
commented 2019-08-07 11:35:55 -0400
Do you really think that attempts to discredit Harris will make any difference in peoples minds? Any person who isn’t a relativist needy moral master-baiter, who can think critically and isn’t invested financially knows this is bullshit. Heck even the big players admit it isn’t really about climate change, warming or otherwise. Catch up.
commented 2019-08-07 11:23:34 -0400
Jeezus, Andrew has a little friend. What’s robust is the bullshit coming from the left. Al Gore absolutely had a hand in the hysteria, after that hideously ridiculous movie slow witted people jumped on that band wagon like it was the second coming of Christ. Gore DID help build the global warming fraud. The man is a born huckster, and grifter.

The science is never settled, never ever. The models lie, the math is wrong. That is undeniable, but go ahead and try, Andrew sure has.

The entire thing is a ruse and a battering ram used against society for control and a revenue stream. Climate disaster in 18 months my arse.
You people are pathetic cult freaks.

I find it entertaining that what you think is proof for your argument is actually proof for ours. Pure comedy.
commented 2019-08-07 11:21:18 -0400
Mr. Tom Harris’ unsupported conspiracy theory the climate change is “hysteria” created to generate ad revenue differs from his past climate change conspiracy theories.

Mr. Harris claimed Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and the 23 House Republicans who accept the scientific evidence of human-caused climate change are part of the socialist plot. Dr. Lehr asserted their primary intention “…is not environmental protection but expanding government power, reducing individual freedom, and turning the world once again to failed socialism. That same socialism tyrannized the world throughout the past as it does now Venezuela, Cuba, and China.” (Source “Republicans Must Lead on Climate Change” by Dr. Jay Lehr and Tom Harris, May 31, 2019, Canada Free Press)
commented 2019-08-07 11:04:43 -0400
And the Rebel likes to print hysteria about climate change “hysteria” for ad revenue.

That’s how media works. It’s hardly a conspiracy, but rather the market at work. If you look at issues in the upcoming election, climate change is routinely at or near the top of the list. Of course the media will cover it.
commented 2019-08-07 10:39:20 -0400
Mr. Tom Harris assertion the left-wing mainstream media is to blame for global warming is inaccurate. The scientific evidence of human-caused climate change is both robust and convincing. (Source “Chapter 2: Physical Drivers of Climate Change” Volume I, 4th National Climate Assessment.)

Mr. Harris promotes outlandish and contradictory conspiracy theories: On Dec 20, 2017, Mr. Harris asserted man-made global warming was a “hoax” and a “plot” initiate in a “single hearing before the Energy and Natural Resources Committee” in 1988. (Source “GLOBAL WARMING: FAKE NEWS FROM THE START” by Tom Harris & Timothy Ball, Dec 20, 2017, Heartland Institute website)

On Jun 18, 2018, Mr. Harris asserted “man-made carbon dioxide causing global warming” was a “myth” created by Maurice Strong. (Source “$312 Billion: Green Energy Makes Ontario the Most Debt-Ridden Province on Earth” by Dr. Tim Ball and Tom Harris, Jun 18, 2018, PJ Media)

On Oct 18, 2018, Mr. Harris blamed former Vice-President Al Gore for the “dangerous mythology of dangerous manmade global warming.” (Source “HOW AL GORE BUILT THE GLOBAL WARMING FRAUD” by Jay Lehr & Tom Harris, Oct 18, 2018, The Heartland Institute)
commented 2019-08-06 19:16:27 -0400
Climate Change Con Artists are starting to worry because they realize that people are beginning to see through their scam, they need to speed things up.