German Ministry Of Environment Identifies, Targets American And German Enemy Skeptics In 123-Page Pamphlet

UBA_PamphletWhen you look at what’s going on in some of the world’s leading democracies today, with some institutions running rampantly out of control without oversight, we should not wonder why people in droves are losing faith and trust in government.

Government issues pamphlet identifying enemy skeptics

The latest example comes from the powerful German Ministry for Environment: Umweltbundesamt (UBA) with the release of its latest 123-page pamphlet titled: Und sie erwärmt sich doch…Was steckt hinter der Debatte um den Klimawandel (It is indeed warmingWhat’s behind the climate change debate?). In the brochure the UBA (Germany’s equivalent of the EPA) insists the climate catastrophe is coming, and appeals to the public not to listen to skeptics.

In fact, the German government pamphlet specifically singles out, identifies and targets US and German skeptics, portraying them as “spreaders of half-truths and misinformation“. Welcome to open and tolerant debate in the Federal Republic of Germany!

You’ll recall that the UBA are the ones who recently admitted being baffled by the 15-year global temperature stagnation that has taken hold.

Government makes it clear: climate debate not welcome!

Reading the pamphlet, it is clear that this is a one-sided, catastrophe-obsessed propaganda piece that advocates completely the alarmist side of the debate and outright dismisses and marginalizes the growing non-alarmist side. The pamphlet is truly a disservice to the German taxpayers and a mass deception of the public. The Greens and the Ministry of Environment, as you will see, are brazenly targeting specific individuals and organisations whose only “crime” is having a differing opinion. Skeptics are being viewed as a threat.

I can’t imagine how intimidated those named in the pamphlet (especially the German skeptics) must feel today. The full power of the German government has them in its sights.

Only alarmists are cited as honest sources

Just a look at the references cited at the back of the pamphlet on page 116 already tells the story. Sources cited include radical environmental groups Germanwatch, Greenpeace and klimaretter.de, ultra-alarmist institutes like the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, and dogmatic outlier scientists like Stefan Rahmstorf, Hans-Joachim Schellnhuber, and Naomi Oreskes, just to name a few.

UBA has black list of American skeptics

According to the UBA, all the climate doubt stems mainly from the USA. Beginning on page 100, the UBA lists the Americans responsible for “spreading doubt and false information“, among them: ExxonMobil, Fred Singer, Sallie Baliunas and Willie Soon, Frederick Seitz, Joe Barton, Pat Michaels, John Christy, Ross McKitrick and the Heartland Institute. The UBA cites the Union of Concerned Scientists and a one-sided Die Zeit smear from November 2012 as its reliable sources for this information.

The name “Rahmstorf” appears throughout the pamphlet. One quickly gets the impression that the pamphlet stems from the German Ministry of Rahmstorf. Little wonder that when taken as a whole, the pamphlet is a huge public deception. Then again, misleading the public is nothing new for Professor Rahmstorf, for German readers: http://www.klimastorch.de/rahmstorf-vs.meichsner.pdf.

On page 106, the UBA claims that the Climategate e-mails “were stolen”, as if by criminals.

The UBA endorses RealClimate.org

On page 116, the UBA tells readers what it feels are reliable information sources of information on climate science. The German Ministry of Rahmstorf , of course, suggests Stefan Rahmstorf, who is “an international renown climate scientist who is often featured in up-to-date books, newspapers and television shows” against the “climate skeptical half truths and false reports“. The UBA also recommends Rahmstorf’s Internetblog Klima-Lounge and the Potsdam Institute.

Moreover, the UBA recommends the site of “a group of 11 American and European scientists, among them Stefan Rahmstorf and Michael Mann, RealClimate”. The UBA also suggests alarmist site Klimaretter.Info as a good source of all sorts of information.

Government black list of German skeptics

The UBA also tells us to whom not to go for information (the bad guys) and publicizes a sort of black list of skeptics. On page 110 it lists the “climate change skeptics in Germany“, which include the European Institute for Climate and Energy (EIKE), Fritz Vahrenholt and Sebastian Lüning, journalists and publicists Dirk Maxeiner and Michael Miersch, film-maker and publicist Günter Ederer, and newspaper Die Welt.

In government’s view, skeptics are crackpots

In a nutshell, here we have the German government informing the public which people to be on the look-out for. If this holds up legally, remains to be seen. It is not the job of the government to tell the public who the goods guys and bad guys are in a public debate.

In its closing statements, the UBA pamphlet writes (p. 113) that:

- Parts of industry are financing campaigns to spread doubt and a false information over the results of climate science; the target is to fool the public;
– Often scientists of foreign disciplines and without any knowledge of climate science appear in public with climate-skeptical claims.”

In the UBA’s view, those who publicly doubt the coming climate catastrophe are to be viewed as crackpots and industry hacks, and are thus to be ignored. The pamphlet reads like a declaration of war. I have a feeling that we have not heard the last of this story.

More tomorrow.

Graphic source: www.umweltbundesamt.de/

47 responses to “German Ministry Of Environment Identifies, Targets American And German Enemy Skeptics In 123-Page Pamphlet”

  1. Coldish

    Is the pamphlet supposedly anonymous? The style and content certainly resemble those of S Rahmstorf (with H J Schellnhuber) in ‘Der Klimawandel’, and also (allowing for the language) that of Rahmstorf in his 2008 article ‘Anthropogenic climate change: revisiting the facts’** . It’s hard to avoid the conclusion that Rahmstorf was closely involved in writing the pamphlet.
    ** In Zedillo, E. (Ed.). Global warming: looking beyond Kyoto. Yale.

  2. Harry Dale Huffman

    With this official, suppressive propaganda, the public is starting to see just how deep and dark are the forces behind “global warming”, with criminal behavior on the part of the very governments that are supposed to champion the rule of law. This is, in short, a bid for absolute political tyranny over the populace, FOR whom the government is supposed to work. And climate science is staining the reputation of true science for the next century.

  3. Paul M

    As well as the Fred Singer, Sallie Baliunas and Willie Soon, they also list Pat Michaels, John Christy and Ross McKitrick , all under the heading
    “Exxon Mobil finances institutions for spreading false information”.

  4. Tom Servo

    Rahmsdorf’s intentions towards all skeptics can be summed up in a phrase:

    [snip - what Tom basically means to say is "they're all misfits" -PG]

  5. Kurt in Switzerland

    What’s with the highlighting in the UBA report (Section B, pp 100-113). Sometimes it emphasizes, sometimes it blocks out underlying text.

    Perhaps authorship recognition software could be used to determine if particular individuals at the PIK may have had a hand in drafting it. Or perhaps a concerned German citizen could merely inquire at his favorite Federal Agency…

    Umweltbundesamt
    Postfach 1406, 06813 Dessau-Roßlau
    info@umweltbundesamt.de
    http://www.umweltbundesamt.de/

  6. Juergen Uhlemann

    I would like to ask Rahmstorf and Schellnhuber what the equilibrium (page 12) of the earth is, when the planet is for about 90% in ice age state. I believe the extreme is the inter glacial period and we are lucky to have it right now.

    Btw: This Pamphlet is against climate change denier and that can’t be us as we know that the climate changes (positive & negative). We are Anthropocentric Global Warming denier.

  7. DirkH

    They use Naomi Oreskes as a source? That’s a good one; that’s like capitulation. Intellectual bankruptcy.

  8. Bloke down the pub

    In the UK, a list of people who ‘can’t be trusted’ would be an open invitation to look up what they had to say that was so naughty.

  9. John F. Hultquist

    Will a close reading of the document reveal the name of Pierre Gosselin and regular readers of NTZ? If no, we will all have to try harder. If the week’s revelations of the high ethical standards within the American government are even half-true, you can bet Pierre, and all commenters and readers are on their list.

  10. grayman

    Pierre, was there no mention of your site. as I am sure you have been a thorn in their side?

  11. Hans K

    A pamphlet issued by UBA is the responsibility of the Minister himself, no matter who actually typed it. May I suggest that the pamphlet is sent to those targeted in it, to let them decide whether to sue the minister. If they do, the minister will have to prove his points and the whole thing could backfire big time and bring all the trolls behind the pamphlet out in open terrain.

  12. Mindert Eiting

    Interesting stuff for lawyers. This sounds to me very unconstitutional whereas Germany has the most modern constitution of the world (1948?). A state publishing black lists of participants in a debate attacks directly the freedom of speech.

  13. DirkH

    BTW, the warmists, in this case the UBA warmists, always try to present themselves as the underdog, which is quite laughable given their limitless access to taxpayer money. The title “und Sie erwaermt sich doch” alludes to Galileo’s “Und sie bewegt sich doch”; in other words, the poor widdle warmists present themselves as the modern Galileos. We had that allusion to Galileo a number of times. Last I checked Galileo did not command all political parties of his time including the government and all government-controlled media…

    UBA warmists, please read a history book.

    1. Mindert Eiting

      Spot on, Dirk. I saw that expression and wondered where it came from. Galileo of course.

    2. chris

      in english: “and yet it moves” so
      “Und sie erwärmt sich doch” ought to be translated “and yet it is warming”.
      As DirkH already said, this is an absurd self-portrayal—as if a german government agency and the warmists were fighting against skepticists like David fought against Goliath.

  14. DirkH

    BTW, for everyone who wants to know what the UBA PDF experts have blocked out with their yellow marker, just select a portin of text and copy&paste it into notepad.

  15. Rick Bradford

    I think the German alarmists are just angry at being behind the US when it comes to burning skeptical books, as San Jose U. did to a book by Steve Goreham.

  16. Manfred

    This is sadly not a first for the Umweltministerium:

    http://www.umweltbundesamt.de/klimaschutz/klimaaenderungen/faq/grundsaetzliches.htm

    This older pamphlet has propably been produced by a PIK group, as the following climategate email indicates (notice, the link in the email is slightly different and no longer working):

    “…a group of us has compiled a web site “sceptics ask, scientists answer” (in German), this site is hosted bei the German government’s environment agency (Umweltbundesamt) at http://www.umweltbundesamt.de/klimaschutz/faq.htm It has responses to all the favorite sceptics arguments, and whenever some journalist or member of public asks about any sceptics arguments, we can simply refer them to this site…”

    http://di2.nu/foia/foia2011/mail/2974.txt

    1. Manfred

      That was, of course, a Rahmstorf climategate email.

  17. RoyFOMR

    123 pages?
    Fool me 1, shame on you; fool me 2, shame on me.
    It’s the 3 that tells us all we need to know.
    The UBA is the Fool!
    Is there a German phrase for “When in a hole, stop digging”?

    1. DirkH

      Sorta; it is “Weitermachen!” (Carry on!).

  18. Sean

    Didn’t Germany just go through its fifth colder than normal winter out of the last six? Given how fresh this is in people’s minds, will the mud thrown by the UBA sully itself more than the intended targets? German energy policy also has its citizens paying the second highest utility rates in Europe. I suspect it’s citizens are intensely questioning the basis of their energy policies.

    1. DirkH

      The well-to-do don’t; as for them the energy costs are insignificant. They are insignificant for me as well but for principal economic reasons I find it ludicrous that energy gets ever more expensive so I protest it. Most people here live hand-in-mouth though in a philosophical way; the ones that live hand-in-mouth in an economic way have no voice in the media. From time to time I listen to public radio; they concentrate on problems abroad – it gives their employees more opportunities to travel to warm places. They are interested in deflecting attention outwards and never talk about the rising energy cost in Germany.

      And what should the poor do? All parties are Green parties. Not one is interested in cheap energy.

  19. DirkH

    Here are, BTW, OECD statistics for the energy balance of OECD countries.
    Germany is on page II.67. Warning: Big download.
    http://www.planbleu.org/portail_doc/energy_balances_oecd_2010.pdf

    We dropped from 60% energy self-sufficiency in 1960 to 40% now ; caused by the phase out of subsidized black coal mining I would think. The newly subsidized renewables don’t contribute a meaningful amount by now; basically only visible in the electricity breakdown, and electricity is only 1/7th of primary energy consumption.

    The only thing that keeps us going is loads of coal imports.
    Noteworthy: the chart on the right upper corner shows that coal got a much larger share of the money in 1973 than now – this is the effect of the coal subsidies back then, the “Kohlepfennig” (a cross subsidy levied on each kWh consumed). At that time this was used to buy the votes of the coal miners.

    This is now replaced with the renewables subsidy; does it buy the votes of solar panel owners? It’s a prisoner’s dilemma just like back then – no party was really willing to remove the coal subsidies back then, just like no party is willing to remove the renewables FIT now.

  20. Ulrich Elkmann

    “Not one is interested in cheap energy.”

    They are incapable of entertaining such a thought: it would be anathema in the traditional Catholic sense to them, as denying the existence of any central religious dogma. The sheer possibility of “cheap energy” brings forth a knee-jerk reaction that it would lead to all kinds of sins against nature, destruction & corroding any moral fibre – across the political spectrum. It has replaced original sin. Remember, in Newspeak “thoughtcrime” meant that the devout/the proles would be literally incapable of thinking such an idea.

  21. Stew Green

    - emwaht about libel law ?
    won’t it cost the German taxpayer a lot of money ?

    1. DirkH

      By that logic, all resistance against a tyranny must be avoided, as the tyrant would only recoup his costs by taking it from his serfs.

  22. MikeC

    I wonder what would happen if some harm came to any skeptic named in this pamphlet and it ended up being climate change related? Liability?

  23. Derek Sorensen

    1) First they ignore you.
    2) Then they ridicule you.
    3) Then they fight you.
    4) And then you win.

    We’re currently at stage 3, and have been for a little while. Stage 4 will be here soon, the AGW scam will be over and we can start looking forward to the next one.

  24. Jean Bosseler
  25. Der BMU-Skandal: Der BMU warnt in einer Broschüre vor kritische Geister und Journalisten | LW-Freiheit

    [...] Nun zieht das aber weite Kreise der Empörung und selbst im Ausland wird scharf beobachtet: German Ministry Of Environment Identifies, Targets American And German Enemy Skeptics In 123-Page Pa… [...]

  26. RSC

    There is growing unrest among the German (public) media. This scandal will not go unnoticed. Maybe Professor Rahmstorf has finally overstretched it:

    http://www.heute.de/Klimawandel-Skeptiker-amtlich-unerwünscht-28010994.html

  27. Bernd Felsche

    Henryk M. Broder writing in Die Welt compares the UBA to the Reichskulturkammer of the Third Reich and methods of the GDR.

    The UBA takes a huge step further. It establishes the boundaries of the climate debate. i.e. it eliminates the debate. And it defines who has the right to say anything and who should remain silent.

  28. Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup | Watts Up With That?
  29. Manicbeancounter

    As I do not speak German, I used a couple of online translators to look see what this document said.
    In discussing at El Nino from pages 14/15

    …während in Indonesien und Australien Dürren auftreten, die teils verheerende Wald- und Buschbrände nach sich ziehen

    This translates as

    while in Indonesia and Australia experience droughts, the partly result in devastating forest and Bush fires

    Interpretation : El Nino could very well be the cause of the recent extreme droughts in Australia.

    From Page 21

    Die Strukturen der Klimaänderungen können dabei regional und jahreszeitlich sehr variabel sein.
    Auch Extremereignisse werden Veränderungen unterliegen. Extremereignisse sind Bestandteil der natürlichen Klimavariabilität. Solche Ereignisse sind Starkniederschläge und damit einhergehende Hochwasser, Trockenperioden, besonders heiße
    oder kalte Tage, Hitzeperioden oder auch Stürme. Wegen ihrer möglichen Auswirkungen sind sie von besonderem Interesse.

    This translates as

    The structures of climate change may be regionally and seasonally highly variable. Even extreme events are subject to change. Extreme events are part of the natural climate variability. Such heavy precipitation events and thus associated floods, droughts, particularly hot or cold days, heat waves or storms. because of their potential impacts are of particular interest.

    Interpretation : Climate is naturally highly variable.

    My Hypothesis. The reason that your German Ministry of Environment is so keen to encourage prejudice against dissenters from orthodoxy is to discourage people from comparing and contrasting differing perspectives. If they did, they would find the “consensus” case to be weak and banal. Unfortunately for science and democracy, they do not occupy a numerically extreme position.

  30. Walter Schneider

    Pierre, a few of the commenters in this thread wonder whether you and NTZ have made it yet onto the index of people and reading material to be shunned. You may think that you got away lightly, so far, but the censors are at work.

    Check http://urlchecker.o2.co.uk/urlcheck.aspx and enter the URL for NTZ. You will find that for those using parental control software or any other filtering and blocking software used in a collaborative effort by O2, Symantec and RuleSpace, your blog is not only “not recommended reading”, but the default is “blocked”. According to O2 and Symantec, about 250,000,000 people experience that your website is blocked or that perhaps is does not even show up on search-return lists.

    The next step is to declare NTZ a hate-site. According to my experience with filtering and blocking, that is likely to happen soon.

    Sorry, Pierre, but someone decided that the information you spread is not good for consumption by juveniles.

    1. DirkH

      The usual tactic of American liberals.

  31. BCarmona

    Barak Obama is also listing every skeptic congressman in Washington DC

    http://www.barackobama.com/climate-deniers/

    1. DirkH

      …and you know what happens when Drone Brother takes names and makes lists…

  32. Like the IRS, the EPA plays favorites | .....Aaron's EnvironMental Corner.....
  33. German UBA Federal Environment Office’s “Declaration Of War” On US And German Skeptics Backfires | The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF)

    [...] have come under intense fire from much of the major German media for having published a pamphlet (background here) defaming and black-listing US and German climate skeptic scientists and [...]

  34. Robert

    They have whole binders full of skeptics’ names.