How I Totally Crushed the Ocean Acidification Alarmist Loons

Meet Dr Phil Williamson: climate ‘scientist’; Breitbart-hater; sorely in need of a family size tube of Anusol to soothe the pain after his second failed attempt to close down free speech by trying to use press regulation laws to silence your humble correspondent.

Williamson ‚Äì who is attached to the University of East Anglia, home of the Climategate emails ‚Äì got very upset about some articles I’d written for Breitbart and the Spectator pouring scorn on his junk-scientific field, Ocean Acidification.

In my view Ocean Acidification is little more than a money-making scam for grant-troughing scientists who couldn’t find anything more productive to do with their semi-worthless environmental science degrees. The evidence that Ocean Acidification represents any kind of threat is threadbare ‚Äì and getting flimsier by the day.

But if, like Williamson, you are being paid large sums of money to conduct a research programme into Ocean Acidification, you’ll obviously want to defend your mink-lined, gold-plated carriage on the climate change gravy train. So first he wrote a long, earnest defence of his income stream in Marine Biologist.

Then, when no one cared, he made a formal complaint about one of my articles to the UK press regulatory body IPSO. And to judge by the punchy tone of this piece he published in Nature before Christmas, he fully expected to win.

Tragically, though, he just lost.

After a long deliberation, IPSO has released its verdict and found that I had no case to answer. Williamson’s complaint was not upheld.

I’m trying hard to be modest here; I’m trying not to gloat. But I’m afraid the facts of the case just won’t allow me.

IPSO’s verdict represents a crushing defeat for the cause of climate alarmism. In this particular scenario, you need to picture me as Julius Caesar in my chariot, wearing purple with a laurel crown around my head; Williamson (and his alarmist cronies) meanwhile, are Vercingetorix and his defeated Gauls (though without the romantic charm and heroism, obviously) being dragged behind me in chains through the streets of Rome prior to being taken to the city’s prison to be ritually strangled.

Seriously, it could hardly be worse for the eco-loons. Just relish the misery in the comments below this report in the Guardian.

Here are some of the comments:

It’s just a passing comment, but Dingopile is an arsehole that knows less than bugger all about climate change! [Do you see what he did with my name there? Comedy genius!]

Nothing written by Delingpole is proper science. The man has a degree in English literature.

So it’s okay to publish outright falsehoods meant to mislead the public, as long as you are of the right?

Delingpole is like a 4 year old child who purposefully defecates in his pants for attention.

Delingpole is not a scientist, certainly not an oceanographer, so why print his ramblings on things he knows nothing about?

James Delingpole is a total arse. He has sunk below the level of Michael Gove or Nigel Farage. He does not deserve this publicity by Damian Carrington. He thrives on the oxygen, and he must not be given any oxygen at all.

Note how very personal it all is. And that’s because, as the last commenter rightly noticed, the Guardian’s Environment editor, the Hon. Damian Carrington, (Winchester and Balliol), decided to make it personal.

His headline read:

James Delingpole article calling ocean acidification ‘alarmism’ cleared by the press watchdog

The article was full of snarky little asides, like:

Delingpole, who writes for controversial rightwing news site Breitbart, was censured by the Australian Press Council in 2012 after he quoted an anonymous source who compared the windfarm industry to a paedophile ring. He has dubbed greens “eco-nazis” and in another article he ended a long list of people and groups supporting action on climate change by writing: “Truly there just aren’t enough bullets!”

[I would like to make it clear if I haven’t already that I apologise profusely to any paedophiles who may have been offended at being linked to the wind turbine industry]

This is because in the eyes of the climate alarmist establishment I am one of the most dangerous people on earth. And I say this not to brag. It is merely an observable fact that there are certain figures ‚Äì in the field of climate science they include people like Willie Soon, Pat Michaels and Tim Ball; in journalism they include me, Christopher Booker, David Rose and, perhaps notably, Mark Steyn; in politics they include Lord Lawson, Aussie Senator Malcolm Roberts and now Donald Trump ‚Äì  who drive the Greenies apopleptic with rage. And because the Greenies see us as significant and influential, they seek at every turn to claim our scalps.

Which, of course, was the whole point of this complaint by Phil Williamson to the press regulator IPSO.

Had Williamson been successful it would have been a major blow to the cause of scientific rationalism, honest scepticism and freedom of speech. It would have been cited and crowed about ad nauseam by the usual suspects in the mainstream media – from the BBC to the New York Times – and in the house journals of the alarmist science establishment, such as Nature and Scientific American.

We know that this was the plan because of how closely the case was being followed by the Guardian‘s environment editor Damian Carrington. The first I heard of the IPSO ruling was when Carrington sent an email to my editor at the Spectator Fraser Nelson asking for a comment on the verdict. (The reason Williamson brought his case against the article I wrote in the Spectator, by the way, and not against any of the ones I’d written in Breitbart is because Breitbart doesn’t subscribe to the press regulator IPSO, so he would have been whistling into the wind). You might think this odd: why would a journalist with absolutely no connection with the case get to hear the result before either the journalist named in the complaint or the publication responsible for running the offending article? The answer, one can only presume, is that Carrington was in close touch with the complainant, Phil Williamson ‚Äì and was waiting to strike the moment the good news came that the Delingpole monster had been slain by Britain’s press regulator.

The knock-on effects, had IPSO found against my article, would have been dire: the publications for which I write (both the Spectator and Breitbart) would have been made to look like sloppy purveyors of what the left loves to call these days “fake news”; my credibility as a reporter on climate science and the environment would have been diminished (not in the eyes of my regular readers, perhaps, but definitely in the eyes of all those undecideds who can’t make up their mind whether they agree with me on climate science or whether I’m talking bollocks); and, perhaps worst of all, the junk science concept of Ocean Acidification would have been given a reprieve it simply doesn’t deserve.

In case I haven’t made my position sufficiently clear on Ocean Acidification ‚Äì always a danger with me: I’m forever holding back for fear that someone somewhere might be offended ‚Äì this seems a good moment to restate it:

Ocean Acidification is a scam ‚Äì the second biggest one in science right now. I’m not saying that it’s impossible or even unlikely that increased atmospheric carbon dioxide may be causing parts of our ocean to become marginally less alkaline. What I’m definitely saying is that it doesn’t matter a toss, to whit:

Ocean acidification – the evidence increasingly suggests – is a trivial, misleadingly named, and not remotely worrying phenomenon which has been hyped up beyond all measure for political, ideological and financial reasons.

It’s much more a political invention than a scientific one. I call it the climate alarmists’ Siegfried Line because that’s what it really is: it’s their fallback position for when man-made climate change theory finally collapses and they need to find some other half-arsed excuse for justifying their global war on the beneficial trace gas carbon dioxide.

Read rest…

Comments (6)

  • Avatar

    Steven Capozzola

    |

    Some obvious flaws in the notion that increased atmospheric CO2 is causing “ocean acidification”:

    1. CO2 concentrations have been far higher than the present, throughout much of the earth’s history. But the oceans never became acidic. If they had we would see the obvious evidence in any dissolved marine fossil layers.

    2. One of the key points of global warming alarmism is the observation that the oceans have warmed over the past 150 years–and should continue to warm as temperatures rise. When water warms it releases dissolved CO2. (This is because CO2’s solubility in water is governed by temperature.) Warming oceans lose CO2 content, which contradicts the idea of increased oceanic CO2–and contradicts the very idea of CO2-driven ocean acidification.

    All in all, ocean pH varies considerably due to location and season. If nothing else, the claims of ocean acidification are questionable at best, simply because of the tremendous variability of marine conditions.

  • Avatar

    Randal

    |

    So you don’t think the world’s oceans are getting warmer? According to your logic the icebergs are breaking up either and if so it’s just some fluke? You are proof that even some Highly Educated men are complete jackasses. According to you everything is fine and dandy so no worries about Greenhouse emissions our disappearing rainforests or unusually aggressive weather patterns not to mention shifting Gulf Stream, world bleaching which has become more rampant in Australia Japan and what’s left of the Bahamas. The educate you pal, Coral is like a canary in a coal mine one of the first indicators of adverse changes in the environment. Heads of Industries that profit off of burning fossil fuels and depleting natural resources will probably take this worthless commentary and use it as propaganda to continue being myopic and greedy despite the ongoing damage, and perhaps the less educated will follow in suit. But to the rest of us we are on to you and know exactly what you are doing, and will continue exposing you for the shallow minded opportunist that you are. Animal and plant Species are becoming extinct every day and there are countless other signs that prove that everything you have written here is a complete lie. Our Generation should be leaving this planet in better condition then we found it for our offspring in generations to come. You are apparently Unbound by any morals but you won’t have the last say in any of these matters nor do you deserve NE judging off what you wrote

    • Avatar

      JayPee

      |

      There is not an iota of proof of anything you have said.
      But you are full of dogmatic condemnation anyway.
      You call anyone who disagrees a ” jackass .”
      And what do you call yourself ?

    • Avatar

      amirlach

      |

      Species go extinct every day? Can you name some from last week?

    • Avatar

      Gator

      |

      … disappearing rainforests or unusually aggressive weather patterns not to mention shifting Gulf Stream, world bleaching which has become more rampant in Australia Japan and what‚Äôs left of the Bahamas.

      Somebody proudly bought a pig in a poke!

    • Avatar

      Tom

      |

      Actually Randal the planet is in much better condition than it was when I was born in 1942.

Comments are closed