Not to beat up on the Independent Institute too much, but I couldn’t help but notice their attempt to make a scandal of the recent BBC series Frozen Planet‘s use of polar bear footage. A key scene from the film shows a mama bear with her cubs, which viewers are led to believe takes place in the wilds of the Arctic. But in fact the scene was shot in a zoo. Though technically deceptive I suppose, this kind of thing is apparently common for the wildlife documentary “industry,” as getting that close to a bear (especially a mama bear) in a natural environment is either too dangerous or too cumbersome.
But I.I.’s David Theroux isn’t having it:
…this is yet another example of the fabrication of evidence by climate alarmists, ranging from scientists to journalists to activists. The scientific evidence shows that despite increases in CO2, there has been no warming since at least 1998. The conclusion to draw is that other factors such as solar, cloud, and/or other factors must be present that not only overrule overall CO2 influences but make the trivial man-made influences of no importance whatsoever. In addition, polar bear populations are increasing, not decreasing, a point that Attenborough conveniently leaves unmentioned along with the fact that the scene of polar bears was staged in a zoo.
When I pointed out that the use of bear footage not taken in the wild was orthogonal to the issue of whether man made global warming was occurring, he responded:
Dain, The simply question here to ask yourself is: why has Attenborough tried to make a point that polar bears are at risk of being decimated by global warming and then have a scene of maternal love for bear cubs? The answer of course is that he believes that such a scene engenders the needed pathos from viewers for the plight of a cozy and cuddly polar bear family and its defenseless young, whose lives are claimed to be at substantial risk unless stringent restrictions on the “pollution” of man-made CO2 emissions are adopted and soon.
Ok, so it’s about as scandalous as politicians, whom libertarians don’t like anyway, kissing babies on the campaign trail to “engender the needed pathos.” Accordingly environmentalism, which libertarians are skeptical of if not outright hostile to, is sanctioned for exploiting the fact that humans think other mammals are cute n’ cuddly. Especially the baby ones.
Theroux’s beef lies with “climate alarmism” per se, but anything used to help it along is bad, bad, bad.