ICCC7 in Chicago: Heartland Institute keeps the debate open

I’ve been on an intensive training course for the last three days and forgot to post this item I prepared last week. Apologies to all.

The seventh International Climate Change Conference got underway in Chicago on Monday. Sponsored by the Heartland Institute, the event has brought together speakers and other attendees from all over the world.

Organiser Jim Lakely emailed to say:

You can cover the conference remotely, as we’ll be live-streaming the event from the opening on May 21 to the close on May 23 on the conference Web site

The “Watch Live” link will be easy to find on Monday, May 21. And a video of every presentation will be available for sharing within a week of the close of the conference.

The previous ICCC to take place in Chicago, ICCC-4 in 2010, attracted nearly 800 scientists, policy experts, elected officials, journalists, and other guests. We expect another large turn-out due to recent developments in the international debate over climate change, a line-up of outstanding speakers, and the global focus on Chicago due to the NATO Summit.

This conference is open to the public. Register to attend this event by visiting the conference sign-up form. Reporters, bloggers and documentary filmmakers may request credentials at the media sign-up form. Federal, state, and local elected officials may attend for free by contacting John Nothdurft at 312/377-4000 or jnothdurft@heartland.org.

Real Science, Real Choices

This year’s theme is “Real Science, Real Choices.” Our goal is to feature approximately 60 scientists and policy experts speaking at plenary sessions and on three tracks of concurrent panel sessions exploring what real climate science is telling us about the causes and consequences of climate change, and the real consequences of choices being made based on the current perceptions of the state of climate science.

Major developments on the science front since the last ICCC took place include publication of a new report by the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) updating its 2009 report, Climate Change Reconsidered, and a new report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) on climate change and extreme weather events.

The past year was marked by major retreats in the U.S. and other developing nations from government subsidies and investments in solar and wind power. The widely publicized bankruptcies of companies including Solar Trust of America and Solyndra, and slow economic growth and fiscal crises afflicting many European countries, have forced policymakers around the world to reconsider the costs and consequences of basing energy choices on fear of man-made global warming.

Climategate and Fakegate

On November 22, 2011, a second batch of emails among scientists working at the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit was released by an unknown whistle-blower. “Climategate II” revealed prominent scientists concealing data, discussing global warming as a political cause rather than a balanced scientific inquiry, and admitting to scientific uncertainties that they denied in their public statements.

Like an earlier release of emails on November 19, 2009, on the eve of the 2009 UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, Climategate II caused an uproar in the scientific community and a further drop in public belief in man-made global warming. But a series of friendly investigations of the Climategate affair, along with the timely expiration of the statute of limitations for the offense of failing to comply with Freedom of Information Act requests, spared the scientists involved from any legal penalties.

On February 20, 2012, another global warming scandal broke, this one involving criminal behavior that is likely to be much more difficult to cover up. Peter Gleick, president of the Pacific Institute and an elected member of the National Academy of Sciences, confessed to using fraud to obtain confidential corporate documents from The Heartland Institute and arranging for them to be posted online. The scandal became known as Fakegate because Gleick also circulated a fake memo he claimed outlined Heartland’s “climate strategy.”

In his confession, Gleick said “a rational public debate is desperately needed.” We agree, which is why we have repeatedly invited scientists with wide-ranging views to speak at these conferences. Indeed, we even invited Peter Gleick to speak at a Heartland event, an invitation he turned down on the very day he began his fraud.