Have you been "Swindled"?
On Thursday 12 July, the ABC screened the UK-produced documentary "The Great Global Warming Swindle".
The show has polarised opinion overseas and stirs debate, sometimes informed, mostly not, about the causes, and validity of responses to, the threat of climate change caused by global warming.
The show's premise is that climate change, if occurring at all, is entirely due to natural causes, and that humanity has not had - indeed, can never have - an effect on the atmosphere.
This is not a premise that is supported by the Queensland Government. Nor would the Government accept the logic that might follow such a premise; if there is no proof of climate change then there is no need to address eco-efficiency and smarter use of our natural resources.
In the context of the ClimateSmart Living campaign, the EPA supports the position of the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change, which states that there is an overwhelming probability that human activities are adding to natural cycles of climate change, and threaten both our ecosystems and economies.
This ClimateSmart Living website undertakes to show people that each individual's actions, however small, really can make a world of difference.
Professor Ian Lowe, a long-time campaigner for environmental protection and eco-efficiency, views "The Great Global Warming Swindle" with deep concerns about its accuracy and its inability to adequately refute the substantial body of climate change research.
Professor Lowe's response to "The Great Global Warming Swindle"
I DEFEND the right of [program producer] Martin Durkin to believe human activity is not changing the global climate.
I could also defend his right to make a film reinforcing that view and combining some science with half-truths and lies.
But I worry that broadcasting the film might mislead the public.
Climate change is a real threat to human civilisation.
Hardly a week goes by without a new report in reputable scientific journals reinforcing the scale of the risk and the urgency of action to slow down the alarming changes already happening.
The Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change, the official UN scientific authority, represents a cautious summary of solid science.
The Great Global Warming Swindle is itself a swindle.
Many of its claims are untrue.
It says volcanoes release more carbon dioxide than all human fuel use. But the average annual release from volcanoes is about two per cent of human production.
It claims medieval times were much warmer than today, but the science shows only some regions were briefly warmer and average global temperatures were lower.
It claims changes in sun-spot activity explain the recent warming, based on a Danish scientist's analysis of pre-1990 evidence, but more recent data disproves the link.
It has Professor John Christy stating that temperature changes in the atmosphere are inconsistent with the theory. But Christy has since admitted this claim was based on incorrect data.
It displays, several times, a graph showing that average global temperature declined dramatically between 1940 and 1976 and claims this debunks the science.
Our hemisphere actually warmed during that period.
Pollution from coal burning caused a slight decrease in the northern hemisphere, so there was a very small overall decline, but nothing like the graph.
Other claims are true, but misleading.
The Earth has warmed in the past because of natural variations in orbit and the sun's output, with related increases in carbon dioxide levels. This shows warming can release carbon dioxide from oceans and vegetation.
It does nothing to refute the science that showed 100 years ago that putting extra carbon dioxide into the atmosphere traps more heat.
The film's fundamental point is that the climate has varied naturally in the past, so there is no reason to believe we are causing the recent changes.
Of course there have been natural variations, but the only models that accurately represent climate change take account of both natural changes and the recent human influence.
Over the past 650,000 years, the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has varied naturally between 180 and 280 parts per million. It is now about 380 parts per milluion and increasing by a further 2-3ppm each year.
Average temperatures are now about 0.8°C higher than a century ago, sea levels are rising, rainfall patterns have changed significantly and we are seeing more frequent severe weather events, just as climate models were predicting 20 years ago.
The most optimistic projection for this century is about double the rate of change of the past 100 years, with other scenarios giving faster change.
Because of the long time lags in the climate system, further change will happen, even if we develop a concerted global response.
We urgently need to cut the rate of releasing carbon dioxide by using cleaner fuels and turning them more efficiently into the services we want: cooking, lighting and transport.
Several European countries now have a target of cutting energy use to a quarter of the present level by efficiency improvements. That should also be our goal.
Australian studies show we could get at least 25 per cent of our power from a mix of renewables by 2020 at no significant cost.
We need serious targets and a realistic price on carbon to drive these changes.
I welcome debate about the science of climate change. It shows we need a concerted response.
I resent this film's claim that environmentalists don't care about the developing world. The poorest people will suffer most from climate change.
The people who really don't care are those who put short-term profits before serious action.
Prof. Ian Lowe is Emeritus Professor of Science at Griffith University and President of the Australian Conservation Foundation.
