Suncor CEO Slams Climate Change Deniers, Politicians Who Criticize Them

'I hope some of those politicians get brave enough to stand up and take some different positions,' CEO says

David Bell · CBC News 

'It is a matter of profound disappointment to me that science and economics have taken on some strange political ownership,' Suncor president and CEO Steve Williams told the audience at a sold-out event Wednesday in Calgary. (Jeff McIntosh/Canadian Press)

The head of Canada's largest oil company says climate change is backed by science, and deniers, including politicians, need to do a U-turn and accept it.

Suncor Energy Inc. president and chief executive officer Steve Williams — speaking on a panel during the event in Calgary titled Bridging Divides: In Search of Sound Public Policies for Energy and Environment in Canada — said he's unhappy with how the debate on climate change has become so polarizing.

"It is a matter of profound disappointment to me that science and economics have taken on some strange political ownership. Why the science of the left-wing is different than the science of the right-wing. Why it's not possible for, certainly within Canada for conservatives, to take a conversation about, 'Hey, it's just a fact. Let's get some facts out on the table,'" Williams told the crowd at the sold-out event.

"Climate change is science. Hardcore science. What we have been talking about here is economics. Science and economics. Both very important subjects, not perfectly understood. Periods of discovery go on forever and we keep getting better and better at those things."

Williams said conservation is a no-brainer.

"It makes sense to consume things sensibly. Common sense is not a big part of the conversation that normally goes on on this thing," he said.

"Energy efficiency, the sensible use of what is a finite resource. My belief is that we will run out of these things in the not too distant future, 100 or 200 years, so we better use them very wisely."

Williams didn't hold back on politicians who aim their rhetoric at deniers.

"I find it scary. And I find the current politics of it — where if you want to vote this side of the politics or that side of the politics, you have to be a believer or not a believer — is complete nonsense, and we shouldn't allow that framing of the debate," Williams said.

"And I hope some of those politicians get brave enough to stand up and take some different positions on it."

And this is the biggest problem... that it has become so political and, as such, has become very nearly hysterical. 

Yes, climate change is real; the planet is getting warmer; I have been saying that since the 1980s, and it has been very obvious. But far-left lunatics are over-reacting, using hyperbole constantly, and calling those who doubt global warming, or who doubt the speed of global warming, insulting, immature names. Mind you, some may deserve it for doing the same thing to those who believe in global warming, but it is not helpful to turn science into emotion.

Science, as Mr Williams stated, is on the side of climate change proponents. This makes deniers easy targets for those who have unshakable faith in science, and those who believe themselves to be superior persons. But making fun of those who disagree with you, even when science seems to support you, is not the behaviour of a superior person, but a lesser person - an immature person.

A superior person would ask himself why deniers can't see the obvious? And if he was willing to look closely, he would see why. He would see that there is evidence that the numbers have been cooked. Science requires unbiased research. A true scientist must be willing to accept that the theory he proposes may be completely wrong. Many climate change scientists are simply not willing to look at that possibility. Scientists who are willing to look at other possibilities cannot get funding for research. 

This is literally a conspiracy theory with lots of supporting evidence. It doesn't deny that science supports global warming, but it denies that the science is not unbiased as science must be.

A couple years ago I posted a story from the UK where a British Lord overheard another British politician declare that the next attempt at a climate accord (Paris 2015) would be successful because the two world leaders who refused to sign the Copenhagen Climate Change Accord would be gone. 

Sir David King, UK ambassador to IPCC, stated quite plainly that there would be an election in Canada in 2015 and they and the UN would make sure that Stephen Harper did not win. He also pointed out that Malcolm Turnbull would pull a political coup on Tony Abbott and replace him as Prime Minister of Australia. I'm sure it's just a coincidence that Turnbull's middle name is Bligh.

Turnbull replaced Abbott in September 2015 and Justin Trudeau replaced Harper in early November, 2015, just in time for the December Paris accord. Harper and Abbot were the only world leaders who refused to sign in Copenhagen. Was it a conspiracy? What else could you call it? 

There are many reasons why deniers have serious doubts about climate change. These are just a couple. If you want to criticize me for anything I wrote, please do so on the basis of facts and in a civil manner. Let's move this debate to a higher level than name-calling.

One-World Government if Harper Loses Election - Margaret Thatcher Advisor

Monckton: Harper defeat in Canada election will allow 

“world government” win at UN Paris climate meet

 Lord Christopher Monckton giving 2014 presentation in Australia titled
"Our Last Year of Freedom?"

Andrew Smith, Australian correspondent
 and Steve Jalsevac
Life Site
BRISBANE, Australia, October 18, 2015 (LifeSiteNews) – According to Lord Christopher Monckton, a former policy adviser to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, Monday's Canadian election will decide if Prime Minister Stephen Harper, whom he calls the last man standing against the establishment of a 'one world government', will remain against a deliberate international effort to remove him. 

The second last, Australia's Prime Minister Tony Abbott, was overthrown, as predicted by Monckton in 2014, in order to clear the way for this international scheme. 

With Harper out of the way, warned Monckton, world governance will finally begin with a successful December, 2015 Paris Climate Conference. Another major factor for the Climate treaty’s likely success this time, after many past failures, is the unprecedented, strong public support of the Roman Catholic Church under Pope Francis.  

The Harper Conservative government has consistently opposed these binding international agreements that impose dramatic limits on the sovereignty of nations in order to resolve still-much-disputed, environmentalist claims of dangerous man-induced climate change.

Organizers of the Paris summit are proclaiming that “for the first time in over 20 years of UN negotiations,” they “aim to achieve a legally binding and universal agreement on climate.” At risk, according to Monckton and many other critics of the “fraudulent” climate change movement, is democracy, its associated freedoms, and the Christian way of life worldwide.

In September 2014, Monckton spoke in Brisbane, detailing his claims of the fraud behind the global warming 'science'. Monckton exposed what he says are the true intentions of what has been presented to the world as a noble environmentalist cause that demands urgent action. 

One of my biggest problems with global warming deniers is their claim that it is all a fraud. I could never see the motive behind committing such a fraud until now. If the UN is able to get all countries to agree to climate goals with penalties for failure, they will, in effect, have formed the basis for a one-world government. Spreading from the innocuous climate portfolio into more substantial areas of our lives will be so much easier.

This concealed push for a one-world government began at the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference in 2009, with a treaty draft containing “The scheme for the new institutional arrangement under the Convention will be based on three basic pillars: government; facilitative mechanism; and financial mechanism …” (UNFCCC draft of the Copenhagen Treaty, Annex 1, Para. 38, 15 September 2009)  (emphasis added)  It was blocked by China.  The Copenhagen conference also included an emphasis on population control as the final solution.

As Monckton points out, “This (environmental treaty) process has nothing to do with the weather.  It has nothing to do with man's impact on the weather.  It has everything to do with establishing the socialist international at the heart of the UN and making every nation bow the knee to this new dictatorship, and the climate is merely a fig leaf to cover what they are trying to do.”

"We'll make sure (Harper) is removed"

Monckton recounted a conversation when Sir David King, William Hague's United Kingdom “climate change ambassador” was asked by the Environmentalist Committee of the House of Commons in May 2014 “whether all the nations of the world were in principle ready to sign their peoples rights away in such a treaty,” to which he replied “Oh yes, but there are two stand-outs.  One is Canada, but don't worry about Canada.  They've got an election in the spring of 2015 and we and the U.N. will make sure that the present government is removed.”  Monckton recalled his absolute bluntness about the matter.

The other holdout was Australia which was in an arguably stronger position as there was no election until after the 2015 Paris Climate Change Conference.  With Tony Abbott as leader there was no chance that Australia would be signing the treaty.  In 2014, Abbott had taken the unusual step of sending an additional minister to accompany foreign minister Julie Bishop to ensure that she did not vote for the treaty at the 2014 Climate Change Conference in Lima.


Monkton predicts Abbott's fall

Monckton warned of the need to protect Abbott and the danger from the Turnbull faction, in conjunction with the United Nations, doing their best to remove him ahead of this year’s Climate Change Conference. 

In February this year, barely five months after Monckton's warning, Abbott survived a first attempt on his leadership from the Turnbull faction.  However, incessant negative and biased media coverage influenced the perception of Turnbull by the Australian population, and hence depressed his polling figures. Consequently, a substantial number of government MPs became anxious with an election less than a year away.  In September, as reported by LifeSiteNews, Abbott was replaced by Turnbull 54-44 in a leadership spill ballot.

The outcome of the Canadian election remains to be seen, but the aim of any behind the scenes involvement by the UN and other climate extremists would be to effect a change of government so that Canada's vote at the December climate conference will be changed.

Monckton has urged people to write to their MPs and ask them to ensure that any treaty draft or treaty that is signed has a clause added that enables a country “when it eventually comes off the Kool-aid and wakes up” to withdraw at a later date after giving sufficient notice.  He provided a previously used example from Article 27 if the Kyoto protocol which Canada itself has used to withdraw from that treaty.

“At any time after three years from the date on which this Protocol has entered into force for a Party, that Party may withdraw from this Protocol by giving written notification to the Depositary.”
By default, the 2015 Paris treaty agreement will not have this.  According to Monckton, we need to “make sure that the nations of the world are not locked into something which in due course they would very nearly all bitterly regret.”

Mr. Monckton was Special Advisor to Margaret Thatcher as U.K. Prime Minister from 1982 to 1986. In 1986 he was among the first to advise the prime minister that “global warming” caused by carbon dioxide should be investigated. Two years later she set up the Hadley Centre for Forecasting: but she, like him, later changed her view. On leaving 10 Downing Street, he established a successful specialist consultancy company, giving technical advice to corporations and governments. His two articles on global warming in The Sunday Telegraph in November 2006 crashed its website after attracting 127,000 hits within two hours of publication.

A speech by Mr. Monckton to 1,000 citizens of St. Paul, Minnesota in October 2009, in which he drew public attention to a then little-known draft plan by the U.N. to establish an unelected world government at the (now-failed) climate summit at Copenhagen in December 2009, received 1,000,000 YouTube hits in a week – thought to be the fastest-ever YouTube platinum for a political speech. Some five million have now seen the presentation on various websites.