Liars, damn liars, statisticians and the worst of all a government hack that has been bought and paid for. This is one of the most misleading titles and stories I have read yet on the Tar Sands. Though in all fairness the distorted spin appears to come from someone other than the scientist.
Harper and his thought police have been muzzling scientists and trying to muzzle opponents. Any bets on whether or not this story gets muzzled. I doubt that it will get suppressed. Not because the scientist is on Harper’s side but because the spin makes it look like he is.
Lets start with the claim in the title ‘coal not oilsands real threat’. The problem here is that in the picture above they are not separating oil and sand they are separating TAR and sand to produce synthetic oil.
The scientist states an indisputable fact in his report; if we burn all the tar sands synthetic oil we get less pollution than if we burn all of the coal in the world. True enough but the article reads as if TAR sands are a good thing because of that fact.
Here is the same fact minus the spin. If all of the coal in the world equals 100 then all of the synthetic oil created from TAR sands would equal far less than 1. So yes if all of the coal is consumed it will be worse than if all the synthetic oil from Tar sands are consumed. But that does not make the TAR sands good for us. And if you look at the report instead of the article nowhere does the scientist claim synthetic oil is a good idea. Indeed if you will read the following quote it seems to me he is telling us we need to get off the oil nipple and pretty darn quick:
“This idea that we’re going to somehow run out of coal and natural gas and fossil fuels is really misplaced. We’ll run out of human ability to live on the planet long before we run out of them.
“I have always said that the tarsands are a symptom of a very big problem. The problem is dependence on fossil fuels.”
Obviously I disagree with the hack who wrote this drivel. Equally obviously I agree with the scientist.