Would this adorable panda bear lie to you? (PS: send money!)
When Conrad Black launched the National Post ten years ago, as a more or less conservative alternative to Canada’s liberal/leftist daily papers, one of his first hires was Donna Laframboise.
Laframboise’s resume doesn’t exactly inspire your confidence, if you’re a typical conservative: she’s got a degree in Women’s Studies (!), and is pro-choice and pro-gay “marriage.”
Yet I always looked forward to her column, because she was clearly allergic to ideological cant from both sides, and not afraid to take an unpopular stand.
After Black sold the Post to one of the country’s most powerful Liberal Party families, many popular writers either resigned or were fired. Laframboise was one of them, and I lost track of her.
But she’s still reporting — just not for a “mainstream” publication. I’m ashamed to say I hadn’t heard of her global-warming-skeptic blog, NOconsensus.org, until she posted an intriguing investigation this week, and some other Canadian bloggers picked it up.
The WWF is an activist organization. Much of its funding comes from public donations. The more successful the WWF is at persuading the public that there’s a crisis, the more likely people are to give it money. (In North America, WWF stands for World Wildlife Fund. Elsewhere, it stands for World Wide Fund for Nature.)
Many of those associated with the WWF are lovely human beings. But that doesn’t change the fact that the WWF is not a neutral, disinterested party. It has an agenda, an ax to grind, a definite point-of-view. Rather than being a scientific organization, it is a political one. In the UK, the media aptly calls the WWF a “pressure-group.”
And unlike every other reporter on the planet, Laframboise used the document’s handy dandy built in search function to poke around that Nobel Prize winning, “scientific” IPCC report on “global warming” and discovered the World Wildlife Fund’s panda prints all over it.
She also notes that peridocals cited in the footnotes of that IPCC report include those two renowned “peer reviewed scientific journals“, Leisure and Event Planning, where you’ll learn the earth-shattering “scientific” “fact” that:
Climate change is projected to have a meaningful impact on the success of some special events by altering the ability of the NCC to maintain ice-based attractions (skating on the Rideau Canal Skateway), changing tulip phenology to cause a mismatch with current Festival dates, and increasing the need for heat emergency planning during Canada Day [which occurs at the height of summer].
“This, apparently,” writes Laframboise ruefully, “is how you win a Nobel prize.”
Of course, given the current state of journalistic affairs, writing blog posts like hers is not how you win a Pulitzer.
Regardless, Laframboise promises to type in “Greenpeace” next…