Complaint to Ofcom Regarding “The Great Global Warming Swindle”

It has been accepted by for example the Stern Review (http://tinyurl.com/vgzxv), that the costs of mitigating climate change will at worst slightly reduce the rate of economic growth. It is definitely not the case that reducing greenhouse gas emissions requires zero or negative growth. This is a falsehood, as is demonstrated by the IPCC 4th Assessment Report Working Group III, 2007 (http://tinyurl.com/ysxugh):

In 2030 macro-economic costs for multi-gas mitigation, consistent with emissions trajectories towards stabilization between 445 and 710 ppm COB2B-eq, are estimated at between a 3% decrease of global GDP and a small increase, compared to the baseline (see Table SPM.4). However, regional costs may differ significantly from global averages (high agreement, medium evidence)

[IPCC 4th Assessment Report Working Group 3 (2007), Summary for Policymakers, page 16.]

Thus the above statement by Dr Singer was a clear misrepresentation of the facts, and given the context, was an apparent attempt both by Dr Singer and by the film maker to mislead the audience.]

(In breach of the 2003 Communications Act Section 265, Ofcom 5.4, 5.5, 5.7, 5.11, 5.12)

[Comment 77: The implied idea that the world’s climatologists, many of whom are based in the US and are financed by US government funds, are motivated by a view of the US as being “great Satan”, is a logical fallacy as well as being a slander.]

(In breach of Ofcom 5.7, 5.10, 7.11)

[Comment 78: His claim to be a co-founder of Greenpeace is disputed, and few people would objectively consider him to be “one of the foremost environmentalists of his generation” – see entry on Patrick Moore in Appendix C.5, page 132.]

(In breach of the 2003 Communications Act Section 265, Ofcom 5.4, 5.5, 5.7, 5.11, 5.12)