DoE boss sets record straight to climate-change denier

| 09/10/2009

(CNS): Climate change is a reality that the Cayman Islands and the rest of the world needs to both recognize and act upon. This is the message delivered by the Director of the Department of the Environment in response to a letter in the local press from a climate change-denier which criticised local spending on developing a National Climate Change Adaptation Strategy. Gina Ebanks-Petrie pointed out that the money for this project is not coming from the CI government but the UK, but above all that the facts and the evidence for climate change, the projected adverse effects, and most importantly the observed trends of local impacts, are too compelling to ignore.

Writing in response to Randy Kinsey’s letter published in the Caymanian Compass on Wednesday 23 September, Ebanks-Petrie said the climate change strategies being undertaken in this and the other Caribbean UK Overseas Territories have all been funded through money acquired from the UK Department for International Development (DFID) and the Caribbean Community Climate Change Center.

She noted that the vast majority of countries worldwide are engaged in projects addressing issues related to climate change.

“There is a growing body of evidence that indicates that taking action to prepare for climate change now will be less costly and more effective than remedial measures in the future,” Ebanks-Petrie wrote. “The DOE and the other institutions involved in this project have based their stance on the work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change an intergovernmental body of hundreds of scientists, which assesses on an objective and transparent basis the latest research and literature produced worldwide relevant to the understanding of climate change and in fact includes review of work that does not necessarily support the global warming hypothesis.”

She noted that in contrast, the sources cited by Kinsey were are not credible. For example, the DoE director said Alan Carlin’s report was rejected by NOAA because it was full of discredited, unoriginal research. She said that Carlin is an economist with no expertise in climate science and Gary Novak has also conducted no research into climate change and has merely selected choice segments of individual papers to try and back up his claims.

“This illustrates why the scientific community has not abandoned the rigours of peer reviewed publication practices in favour of looking to opinions posted by persons on the worldwide web,” Ebanks-Petrie said.

She added that her department agrees that the Cayman Islands will be able to do little to influence the rate at which global sea surface temperatures and sea levels will continue to rise and that the IPCC has concluded that small island states (SIDS) are especially vulnerable to the projected impacts of climate change.

“Like many SIDS Governments worldwide, the DOE, its National Climate Change Adaptation Working Group partner agencies and the Caribbean Community Climate Change Center are therefore working to devise a strategy that will reduce the vulnerability of these islands to these impacts. Additionally the strategy will help the Cayman Islands address more successfully, and with less cost, the current impacts of extreme weather events to which they are exposed, such as tropical cyclones given their position in the ‘hurricane alley’ of the Caribbean,” she added.

The response comes at a time when the department is fighting harder than ever to protect the local environment in the face of drastic cuts to its budget. Estimates suggest that the DoE has had a reduction in its budget by as much as 39%, one of the biggest cuts to any government department.

As a result, the director has expressed real concern that enforcement officers will be limited in their ability to ensure Cayman’s marine environments are protected, that her staff will be able to continue with their extensive field research and that time is running out for Cayman’s fragile and dwindling natural environment.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Category: Science and Nature

About the Author ()

Comments (8)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Maurice says:

    "Anthropogenic global warming" is one of the biggest frauds ever perpetuated and the lie that there is any scientific consensus on the subject has been disproved time and time again.

    the Al Gores of this world have a vested interest and a greed laden agenda all their own. He himself stands to make huge profits from the sale of so called "carbon credits" and the whole circus is being used to introducepunitive taxation on millions of people around the world. Did you know that more than one hundred new taxes are being considered in the US alone?

    The fact that the planet’s climate is in a state of constant change has been stated time and time again and scientists and climatologists keep repeating the fact that warming and cooling of the earth is affected by sun spot activity, cloud cover and many other things, but there is no evidence to suggest that human activity is having the disastrous effect that has been claimed by those who stand to profit from the theory. 

    The whole issue of carbon emissions has been debunked constantly as pseudo scientific nonsense by thousands of scientific observers. There is plenty of information out there for those who care to look and you should care. When those with hidden agendas claim that the debate is over, that is exactly the time to ensure that the debate continues.

    Don’t be afraid to speak out against these lies as this is what the proponents of the whole scam rely on. Fear of ridicule is not a good reason to do your own investigations and make up your own mind. The corporate media is not a reliable source, they serve the people who promote the lies.

    The quote in the above piece “This illustrates why the scientific community has not abandoned the rigours of peer reviewed publication practices in favour of looking to opinions posted by persons on the worldwide web,”

    is extremely misleading and plants the suggestion that there is a consensus in the scientific community and that any oponion that opposes the myth of man made global warming is a fruitcake not worthy of your attention. This is blatantly nonsense and encourages people not to think for themselves.

    The implications for mankind if the policies being pushed by these people are far more frightening that the fate that these people promise as a result of global warming. The end result of cap and trade combined with carbon taxes will have the effect of damaging human society far more, even possibly destroying it. It will mean no development for Africa and the poorer parts of South East Asia, no economic recovery, and as a result will end in millions and millions of lives being lost. Exactly the results in other words that the propogandists would have you believe will be those of man made global warming.

    If people would just take the time out to learn and study the arguments as opposed to blindly accepting the sensationalism and scare mongering put out by those in the media and governments they would see that yes, the planet is warming and that climate change is a naturally occurring state. Currently, other planets in our solar system are also warming as a result of increased solar activity.

    Remember that a huge industry has grown up around this pseudo scientific nonsense. There are now so many financial interests being served by the gravy train that it is hardly in the interests of a great number of people to bring it all to a halt. Please go and investigate the likely results of the changes that are being foisted upon you, look at the bigger picture and understand how those pulling the strings of power will use this phenomenon to cause untold harm to millions of people. These lies and the results of believing them are a far more real threat to the world than the hysterical claims and scaremongering of the global warming cheerleaders.

    • Maurice says:

      I would just ask, before the slew of attacks are forthcoming from those who will accuse me of being a "loony" or try to tear down my statements with unsubstantiated "facts" and accusations of my disregard for the welfare of humanity, which I entirely expect, that you ask yourself the question…"who stands to gain from this mass hysteria?"

      While you ponder that question, I will remind you of something Mark Twain once said….

      "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on not understanding it"

      If you cannot give yourself a satisfactory answer to this question, you are not informed. Just do some searches on things like "global warming lies" or "climate change lies", you get the idea and you can substitute words like fraud if you prefer.

      Neither do I confuse an understanding that we need to take better care of our environment/planet than we have perhaps done thus far in terms of pollution, deforestation etc, with this one issue.

      It is simple; powerful people who have nothing but their own selfish and evil aims in mind are using your ignorance and apathy to usher in changes to the world that will have terrible implications for our future and that of our children, grandchildren and beyond. History shows us that it has been done time and time again – propoganda works on the basis that misdirection, manipulation and lies grow more effective once you are prepared to repeat them over and over and over and fool people into thinking they have a real stake in those lies.

  2. Randy Kinsey says:

    I have not been placed by any company or other entity to make any statement that might prove beneficial to them. I hardly think that I am a loony. I have led a very successful sixty-eight years and have a vested interest in my new island home. 


    The point of my initial letter to the editor of the Cayman Compass was an attempt to bring to light activities within the government agencies that spend money that the government does not have. At least Gina was cognizant enough to read the letter and respond. I would hope that the response was aimed at the whole population of the Cayman Islands and not just me. 


    As for the science of “Global Warming”, the reliability of current available information depends entirely on whom you choose to believe. The current trend is that a few are getting rich off the fear of many. I also have a huge problem with a group of people, scientists included, sitting down in a conference room and developing a plan for mitigating rising sea level problems that may or may not occur sometime in the next one hundred years. It appears that the only solution is to find a very high mountain somewhere.


    It seems that my letter had its intended affect. The director of DoE responded and a number of you folks are discussing it. If the CI Government is not spending money on this project I think that DoE should be congratulated. Acquiring that information is the reason for the initial letter.


    Randy Kinsey

    Caymanian by Choice, American by Birth, Texan by the Grace of God 

  3. L'll bit a lime juice says:


    for political commitment to the Cayman environment see the centre pages

    or google:  "Cayman biodiversity action plan McKeeva"

  4. Joe Average says:

    It is common knowledge that oil firms and car manufacturers hire people to install letters in local news media with the public’s assumption they are reading a letter from a private individual.  Usually the letter is from someone claiming to have a degree of a sort to lend credibility.  As P.Eng. retired, etc.   Use your own common sense as well as seeking out valid information and you will see climate change is a clear concern for all.

  5. The Devil in blue jeans says:

    God can change the climate however and whenever he/she wants to. Who is the Director to question gods work?

  6. Yo Mama says:

    I am happy to see that Gina answered back. Usually the loonies have their say and that’s it. Too often they are able to convince many people who are unfamiliar with the overwhelming science behind climate change.

    The big question is why Cayman’s elected leaders have had little to nothing to say on this topic over the last 20 years. For example, has McKeeva Bush ever said anything of substance about climate change? Ever?

    • Anonymous says:

      Climate change has only been a main stream issue as it is now since ‘An Inconvenient Truth’.  20 years?  Small island politicians not mentioning it? Why is that a big question?

      Also it used to be global warming didn’t it?  Until they realized they were wrong and now the new term is ‘climate change’…   Its so politicized now it is hard for most people to tell what is of substance.  Al Gore’s movie was not a good unbiased documentary, that is what I know.