July 20, 2022
Institute for Strategic Dialogue
PO Box 75769
+44 (0) 20 7493 9333
ATTN: Sarah Kennedy, Chief Operating Officer
Re: Request for Retraction of “Deny, Deceive, Delay: Documenting and Responding to Climate Disinformation at COP26 and Beyond” and a formal apology to those you have maligned (pdf below)
On or about June 9, 2022, your organization, Institute for Strategic Dialogue, issued the above named report which publicly maligns and spreads false information about our organization, Friends of Science Society, and which contravenes the several fundamentals of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights and its preamble.
Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people, (bold emphasis added)
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
Your ironically named “Institute for Strategic Dialogue” appears to be unaware of the definition of the word “dialogue”. The Oxford dictionary defines it as: a formal discussion between two groups or countries, especially when they are trying to solve a problem, end a disagreement, etc.
Your organization’s ‘solution’ to climate commentary you dislike, or dispute is to create a formal system of climate monologue – as Oxford defines this: a long speech by one person during a conversation that stops other people from speaking or expressing an opinion. (Bold emphasis added)
To this end, your organization, together with others, has created an absurd definition of ‘climate misinformation and disinformation’ which you and others have proposed and intend to formalize as ‘algorithmic law’ in Big Tech and media via the COP27 Presidency and the UN itself, thus violating the UN’s own Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the long-standing British and Western heritage of freedom of speech, integral to the Magna Carta which dates back to 1215, the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen, born of the bloody French Revolution, and the fundamental freedoms inherent in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and Canada’s heritage of Freedom.
As you may be aware, the world is now on the brink of famine due to the energy crisis. This crisis was predominantly caused by influential forces like the UNPRI, Mark Carney, and activist climate groups pushing divestment from oil and gas and coal in favor of renewables and the climate agenda. There has been significant divestment in the past few years and investors and corporations have been threatened with bankruptcy by UN Climate czar, Mr. Carney, if they do not comply with the climate change agenda.
Now with the skyrocketing price of fertilizer due to energy shortages, exacerbated by the Russia-Ukraine conflict and loss of their ~30% food and fertilizer supply to the world, many millions of people will suffer, and thousands will die. This is due to a decades-long media monologue on a falsely claimed ‘climate consensus’ and a highly contrived ‘climate emergency.’ This is thanks to a LACK of constructive, open, civil debate on climate and energy policies and full cost-benefit analysis. You are advocating for further stifling of open, civil debate; we advocate for open, civil debate. This is the principal issue that we advocate for. Consider your role in these crimes against humanity, as outlined by Amartyr Sen, some 23 years ago:
We ask that you:
a) Retract the report and issue formal apologies to those maligned
b) Rescind the climate censorship initiative
c) Engage and encourage open, civil debate on climate and related energy policies
d) Encourage your funders and partners to do the same
If you are unable or unwilling to do this, then at the very least, your organization should be stripped of its charitable status as there is nothing charitable about such activity. In fact, you are in contravention of your own stated “Charitable objects” of your Governing Document filed with the UK Charities Register, excerpt below (bold added).
1) THE ADVANCEMENT OF THE EDUCATION OF THE PUBLIC IN THE UNITED KINGDOM AND ELSEWHERE IN RELATION TO GOVERNMENT, ECONOMICS, POLITICS, LAW, ADMINISTRATION AND SOCIAL SCIENCES; 2) THE PROMOTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS (AS SET OUT IN THE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND SUBSEQUENT UNITED NATIONS CONVENTIONS AND DECLARATIONS) IN THE UNITED KINGDOM AND ELSEWHERE BY ALL OR ANY OF THE FOLLOWING MEANS: A) RAISING AWARENESS OF HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUES; B) EDUCATING THE PUBLIC ABOUT HUMAN RIGHTS; C) COMMISSIONING AND/OR CARRYING OUT RESEARCH INTO HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUES; AND D) CONTRIBUTING TO THE SOUND ADMINISTRATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS LAW; 3) THE PROMOTION OF NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL CONFLICT RESOLUTION AND RECONCILIATION FOR THE PUBLIC BENEFIT IN THE UNITED KINGDOM AND ELSEWHERE WITH A VIEW TO MAINTAINING SOCIAL COHESION AND TRUST WITHIN AND BETWEEN COMMUNITIES DIVIDED BY ETHNICITY, RELIGION, POLITICS AND BACKGROUND BY ALL OR ANY OF THE FOLLOWING MEANS: A) INVESTIGATING AND IDENTIFYING PROBABLE CAUSES OF CONFLICT WITH A VIEW TO PREVENTING THE OCCURRENCE OF CONFLICT; B) COMMISSIONING AND/OR CARRYING OUT RESEARCH TO IDENTIFY POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS TO ISSUES OF CONFLICT; C) MEDIATING WITH PARTIES TO THE CONFLICT AND OTHERS TOGETHER TO DISCUSS POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS ENABLING THEM TO BUILD TRUST; AND D) RECOMMENDING TO THE PUBLIC AND PARTIES INVOLVED, MEASURES WHICH ARE LIKELY TO RESULT IN THE RESOLUTION OR PREVENTION OF A POTENTIAL OR MANIFEST CONFLICT; AND 4) SUCH OTHER CHARITABLE PURPOSES AS THE TRUSTEES SHALL FROM TIME TO TIME THINK FIT.
In your website section on ‘Ethics’ you claim that you only accept funding from organizations that protect fundamental human rights.
“The funder demonstrates respect for and adherence to universal human rights, freedom of speech, democracy and the rule of law, and does not support or condone extremism or terrorism”
Yet listed as funders are
Facebook regularly censors our freedom of speech. Here are some examples:
Facebook Censors Free Speech
In the above instance, Facebook was blocking our organization from publicizing a speaking event on …. Freedom of Speech.
Australian Wildfire Facts Blocked by IFCN, Poynter and Facebook
Facebook Fact Checkers Fail on Shellenberger Apology: Double Standards on Climate and Freedom of Speech
No Climate Emergency say 500 Scientists to UN
The foregoing video received some 700K views before Facebook began shadow banning it and demoting any party that posts it on their own website, even though Michelle Stirling, our Communications Manager, is simply reading the CLINTEL press release that mainstream media refused to publicize. CLINTEL now has over 1,113 signatory scientists and scholars who reject the climate emergency narrative and provide a reasoned document of their view on climate.
More recently, we have shown that Facebook is spreading climate science misinformation about Alberta in its climate science center.
Factchecking Facebook’s Climate Science Centre
Likewise, Google owns YouTube, which has recently engaged in the soft-censorship method of flagging our videos with a tab that clicks through to a UN climate hysteria page. We have shown this to be climate misinformation/disinformation by the UN and YouTube.
YouTube Goes Climate Crazy
In April 2021, Greta Thunberg, who has terrified children and adults around the world with her statement “I want you to panic…” admitted in testimony to the US Congress that there is no science behind her statement, that it is ‘just a metaphor.’ We do not see that Greta has been censored or her posts taken down from social media – nor do you make mention of this egregious abuse of the naïve trust of children in your report.
Greta’s “Panic” Claims Not Backed by Science …says Greta
Clearly you are not only maligning individuals and scientists and Professional Engineers, but people who employ their scientific skill and good conscience to make every attempt to engage in open, civil debate. You are encouraging censorship, contrary to your stated charitable mandate, to the detriment of humankind, even though your Charitable Registry claims:
Who the charity helps:
The General Public/mankind
Since there has been such focus on the contrived social proof of ‘climate consensus’ over the past decades of climate change mantras, the public is unaware that skeptical views are integral and entirely necessary for the advancement of science, as explained in “On Being a Scientist: Responsible Conduct in Research”, by the National Academies of Science.
Other than some broad agreement that humans contribute to climate change through their industrial activity, agriculture, and urbanization, there is a large diversity of views and research on climate change which your initiative will squelch. ‘Consensus’ is not the goal of science.
Since your report breaches several fundamentals of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, that you engage with partner/funders who engage in censorship – contrary to your ethical policy, and that your proposed ‘monologue solution’ on climate discourse contravenes the very essence of the word ‘dialogue’ inherent in your name and stated charitable Governing Objects, we demand that you retract your report and issue apologies to those maligned.
Ron Davison, P. Eng.
Friends of Science Society
Friends of Science Society is an independent group of earth, atmospheric and solar scientists, engineers, and citizens that is celebrating its 20th year of offering climate science insights. The society is member-funded, does not represent any industry, does not accept government funding, and is run by volunteers. After a thorough review of a broad spectrum of literature on climate change, Friends of Science Society has concluded that the sun is the main driver of climate change, not carbon dioxide (CO2). We declare no conflicts of interest.