Despite broad agreement among scientists (the majority of whom have short hair, in my observations at many science gatherings over the years) and even many in the fossil fuels industry that the planet is warming and that it poses real threats to the land in coastal areas, the global economy and human health, a recent Pew Research Center survey put it 20th on the list of concerns for Americans (the economy, jobs and terrorism top the list).

The reason, as presented today in The New York Times: "When someone thinks of global warming, they think of a politicized, polarized argument," says Robert M. Perkowitz, founder and president of EcoAmerica. "When you say 'global warming,' a certain group of people think that's a code word for progressive liberals, climate gooks and other such issues."

EcoAmerica conducted polls and focus groups to arrive at this. The findings weren't supposed to leak out yet, but somebody emailed them by accident to journalists.

Perkowitz says if the science community and others want people to take the threat of climate change seriously, they need to change the terms they use, according to the Times report. Among his suggestions: Talk about "saving money for a more prosperous future" instead of speaking about "energy efficiency."

Hogwash? Well, words certainly do matter, and watering them down can certainly ease fears. As we learned earlier last month: Swine flu is just H1N1.

In the view of Deforestation Watch, people are turned off by Global Warming because it reminds them of Nuclear Winter, Y2K, and other phony scare tactics that raised millions of dollars for participating government scientists.

It certainly does not help the environmental cause when “environmental organizations” like Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth (FOE) and the Rainforest Action Network (RAN) should choose to launch spurious anti-palm oil campaigns that are based, not on fact, but on wild unsubstantiated claims.

For instance, all 3 organizations have made baseless claims to the effect that plantation companies in Indonesia and Malaysia — which together produce 87 percent of all palm oil — have come under fire for leading to deforestation that contributes to the demise of animals like orangutans and Sumatran elephants, which betrays a callous disregard for the vastly different planting environment in Malaysia and Indonesia.

First, it is well established that Malaysian planters have been planting mainly on legitimate agricultural land, on old oil palm or rubber estates or on previously logged over areas.  To accuse Malaysian planters of having come under fire for deforestation that contributes to the demise of animals like orangutans and Sumatran elephants is reckless posturing and a gross regurgitation of baseless allegations made by
self-interested parties with a well known propensity for magnification, misrepresentation and fact bending to suit their ends.

First, Malaysia had been the world’s largest producer of palm oil for more than a century.  Despite this, the country can still boast of 55% forest cover (which is a darn sight larger than the 20% or so forest cover in the countries from which these paragons of environmental virtue hail), which immediately demolishes the “environmentalists’” contention that there has been massive deforestation taking place. 

Even if we take into account the Malaysian State of Sarawak, where the most aggressive percentage of new oil palm plantations are being established, forest cover is still exceeding 79%.  How can it be even remotely accurate to allege that deforestation on a scale “that contributes to the demise of animals like orangutans and Sumatran elephants” are taking place?

It is well established too that palm oil is the most sustainable of ALL the oilseed crops with a yield close to 10 times that of its nearest competitors such as soy, rapeseed or sunflower.  For instance, palm oil has a typical yield of 4 to 5 metric tons per hectare planted which dwarfs the typical yield of 0.5 tons per hectare for its competitors. 

What this means is that palm oil requires an extremely small footprint in terms of land use to yield the same unit of edible oil as its competitors.

Also, the oil palm tree, as a full grown tree, has a high leaf index and a productive life of 20-30 years, dispensing with the requirement for annual tilling and replanting that renders it remarkably effective in sequestering CO2 and supporting biodiversity when compared to its closest competitors and other oilseed crops.  For example, olive farms are notorious for using too much water or need irrigation; prone to desertification and soil erosion by wind with almost no biodiversity, and thus contribute minimally in
combating global warming. The olive plantations are so inferior in environmental sustainability compared to oil palm plantations in Malaysia.

Thus it is indeed baffling why palm oil has been singled out for criticism.

The allegations of the impending demise of orang utans due to deforestation caused by palm oil ignores the fact that recent studies appear to show that the orang utan population in the wild which currently is estimated to stand at between 45,000 and 60,000 could actually be growing rather than diminishing. The recent discovery of more than 2,000 previously undiscovered orang utans living in the wilds of Borneo had left many environmentalists red-faced as it confirms the findings that the orang utan population in the wild may not be as threatened as they are made out to be by “environmentalists” and media organizations.

  Are the "environmental orgainizations" even aware of the many orang utan conservation initiatives put in place such as the orang utan conservation centres established in Indonesia including those at Tanjung Puting National Park in Central Kalimantan, Kutai in East Kalimantan, Gunung Palung National Park in West Kalimantan, and Bukit Lawang in the Gunung Leuser National Park on the border of Aceh and North Sumatra. In Malaysia, conservation areas have been set up and they include the Semenggoh Wildlife Centre in Sarawak and Matang Wildlife Centre also in Sarawak, the Sepilok Orang Utan Sanctuary near
Sandakan in Sabah and the Orang Utan island, an orang utan conservation and rehabilitation center established at Bulit Merah, Perak.  The Malaysian Palm Oil Council had also launched a US$5 million wildlife conservation fund largely directed at orang utan conservation.

Deforestation Watch is compelled to ask whether it is precisely the extreme productivity of palm oil with the consequent low pricing and growing popularity with food manufacturers and biofuel/biodiesel producers that is at the heart of these anti-palm oil campaigns.

People do not like to be manipulated, and that's the real reason they're turned off by these spurious anti-palm oil attacks and the Global Warming scam. It cannot be denied that the topic of deforestation and global warming does make people  think of long haired extreme liberals who are just running with the topic without examining the facts and not even knowing the science behind it.  THE END