I think all of us are still in a bit of shock about how COP15 actually went down. We’ll be reporting more in the new year, but for now would like to say that manning the booth and dealing with the lines at the Bella Center left little time to blog as we had hoped.

For now, here are some pictures of the booth, including the ribbons we handed out that are a Brazilian tradition. Please note the banner of signatures from York students under the exhibit booth. We’ve also got a shot of the mural that we brought from an FES popular education class!

I started writing this blog post in June 2009, which was long before I found out that Lomborg was back on the public stage. In retropect, it’s interesting to see how my thinking was evolving. I was very cool with giving skeptics a fair hearing, and the tone is quite light. However, 6 months on, I am definitely feeling much less patient than I was back in the summer. How times change…

“My blog about animal rights activists‘ tendency to be as biased in their use of the peer-reviewed literature as climate change deniers got me thinking that I’d better pay some attention to both groups’ claims that the majority of scientists are actually biased against them.

In the case of animal rights activists, a recent court case about cormorants, upheld Parks Canada’s culling of cormorants on Middle Island to reduce mortality of the trees, plants and other animals.  Birders have striven to make the case that cormorant numbers were always really high, and that they should not be managed.  But there’s actually not a lot of evidence to support their position.

BY PROFESSOR STUART SCHOENFELD, CHAIR OF SOCIOLOGY, GLENDON COLLEGE, YORK UNIVERSITY ( schoenfe@yorku.ca)

From one perspective, the climate change conference in Copenhagen looks rational.  It’s about science – understanding the implications of the largest scientific project in history – and it’s about deliberation – well briefed representatives of 192 nations brought together to write an international treaty.  But the meeting is not so rational.  People come to the negotiating table not only with interests, but also with emotions.  The negotiators in Copenhagen represent some who feel entitled, others who feel resentful and yet others who feel powerless.  This play of emotions seems to be the story of the conference, a global summit of desires, fears, outrage and frustration.  Out of this mix of emotions, the challenge is to feel and act on the latent but powerful feeling of mutual responsibility.

The feelings of resentment and powerlessness come into focus when the feelings of entitlement are acknowledged.

Well, I was wrong, wrong, wrong, when I told several colleagues, some weeks ago, that the CRU (Climate Research Unit) at UEA (University of East Anglia) e-mail hacking incident was silly, and to ignore it.

It has not gone away, because climate-change deniers are fully invested in launching what appears to me to be an across-the-board attack on peer reviewed science. This has happened before, to whit, the lobbying for and subsequent removal of Robert Watson as Chair of IPCC (the Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change).

How on earth should the scientific community respond? Well, I challenge everyone to hack into your own emails using terms such as “rejection”, “rejected”, “plagiarism”, “trick”, “fix” and see what emails you come up with. Then you can find incriminating phrases that can be taken out of context and used to self-smear your own integrity as a scientist.

Today at the United Nations Climate Change Conference, also known as COP15, in Copenhagen, Tuvalu, a small Polenisian island nation, won the first ever “Ray of the Day” award, which will be given for actions that substantially advance the negotiations. The Ray of the Day is a new award given by the Fossil of the Day Awards that conversely decorate the country with the worst performance for the talks. Canada has already won four Fossil award, when counting the two targeted at industrialized countries; how disappointing!

Anyway, Tuvalu won the Ray of the Day for proposing that the plenary session discuss transparently a legally binding amendment to the Kyoto Protocol: that the treaty require countries to keep temperature rises to no more than 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. Tuvalu is one of the islands that will be affected first by rising sea levels due to climate change.