The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has a prestigious reputation in weather and climate science. Its mandate is to inform the public and policy-makers about environmental issues. Recently, however, this body seems to be delving into strange territories. In a peculiar turn of events, NOAA’s recent organization wide seminar on combating disinformation cited ‘Skeptical Science’s’ creepy John Cook, If this is the level of expertise we’re resorting to, then it’s time to delve deeper into the complexities of NOAA’s tactics.
Yes, the climate has always been changing, it’s part of Earth’s nature. The question isn’t about its existence; it’s about the magnitude of human influence and the catastrophic narratives that often seem more rooted in hysteria than science. This was notably seen in Margaret Orr’s recent presentation, ‘Wildfire Lies: A Crash Course in Climate Change Misinformation,‘ where she prescribed a singular perspective on climate change, with little room for debate or dissent.
NOAA Central Library
During the seminar, Orr summarily dismissed anyone who doesn’t adhere to the catastrophic climate change narrative as ‘misinformed’. The binary logic she employed creates a false narrative: you either believe climate change is primarily human-caused and catastrophic, or you are an ill-informed individual spreading ‘fake news’. This simplification blatantly overlooks the nuanced and ongoing debates within the scientific community about climate sensitivity, feedbacks, and our capacity to adapt.
One aspect of Orr’s seminar, which demands scrutiny, is the argument about ‘slow thinking’. The idea suggests that individuals who don’t subscribe to the catastrophic narrative aren’t applying enough cognitive effort to understand the issue.
Read the PDF here
This argument is a subtle way to undermine the intelligence and reasoning capability of those who don’t align with their views. It’s a derogatory tactic that ignores the fact that many dissenting voices are often well-versed in the science and simply interpret the data differently or place it within a broader historical context.
Moreover, the seminar placed considerable emphasis on ‘confirmation bias’, suggesting that people tend to believe information that aligns with their pre-existing beliefs. While this is undoubtedly true, it applies to all of us, including those propagating the catastrophic climate change narrative. To suggest that this is a problem only on one side of the debate is disingenuous at best and manipulative at worst.
The most disconcerting element of the seminar was its proposition to ‘combat misinformation’ by essentially telling people what to think. The ‘truth sandwich’ concept Orr presented is a classic technique used in propaganda motivated journalism: tell them the ‘truth’, insert the ‘lie’, then repeat the ‘truth’. It was invented by George Lakoff as a means of combatting “misinformation”.
But who determines the truth in a field that is still very much under scientific investigation?
Read the PDF here
Furthermore, it seems that the argument is no longer about understanding the complexities of the Earth’s climate system, but about ‘breaking and fixing audience mental models.’ This condescending approach undermines the intellectual autonomy of individuals and implies that they should simply adhere to what they’re told.
Read the PDF here
It is abhorrent, but not shocking these days, that the Federal government is actively financing campaigns to indoctrinate, manipulate, and control its own citizenry. Other examples of these horrifying government funded initiatives to control what the people think and believe include but are not limited to:
NewsGuard
NewsGuard is a Pentagon funded member of the US Government’s Censorship Industrial Complex.
Embedded in the post was a picture of a nearly $750,000 award from the Department of Defense to NewsGuard, an organization the independent journalists characterized as a “government-funded” entity implicated in the Censorship Complex.https://thefederalist.com/2023/03/13/newsguard-claims-not-to-be-government-funded-but-a-750k-grant-suggests-otherwise/
They work to strengthen and enhance government approved narratives and work to suppress, starve, and deplatform independent thinkers and publishers.
In response to Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz’s question — “Who is NewsGuard?” — Shellenberger explained: “Both the Global Disinformation Index and NewsGuard are U.S. government-funded entities who are working to drive advertisers’ revenue away from disfavored publications and towards the ones they favor.”https://thefederalist.com/2023/03/13/newsguard-claims-not-to-be-government-funded-but-a-750k-grant-suggests-otherwise/
In addition to attacking revenue and deplatforming, NewsGuard works with the ideologically captured teachers’ unions and school system to block, discredit, and censor wrongthink and thoughtcrime.
CISA
DHS Expands Its Censorship Powers
Demands from the government that social media companies censor content have increased under President Joe Biden. In January 2021, the Cyber Security and Infrastructure Security Agency, which was created in 2018 to respond to election disinformation, broadened its scope “to promote more flexibility to focus on general” misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation. Where misinformation can be unintentional, disinformation is defined as deliberate, while malinformation can include accurate information that is “misleading.”
In January 2021, CISA replaced the “Countering Foreign Influence Task Force” with a “Misinformation, Disinformation and Malinformation” team “to promote more flexibility to focus on general MDM.”
The move included a further turn inward to focus on domestic sources of MDM. The MDM team, according to one CISA official quoted in the IG report, “counters all types of disinformation, to be responsive to current events.” Geoff Hale, the director of the Election Security Initiative at CISA, recommended the use of contractor nonprofits as a “clearing house for information to avoid the appearance of government propaganda.”
https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/shellenberger-testimony.pdf
This out-of-control, top-down, shut up! We know what’s best for you mindset, is the province of despots, not democracies.
In conclusion, NOAA’s association with John Cook and his old weird, creepy, SKS team, adds an odd flavor to the entire discourse. While it is important to educate, it is far more important to ensure the tactics used are not rooted in propaganda, and the expertise referenced does not court such bizarre controversies. A balanced and respectful discourse needs to be one where all voices are heard, and science is not twisted to suit a particular narrative. After all, science is about inquiry, debate, and a relentless pursuit of truth, not about ‘fixing’ those who don’t agree with us.
References:
Wildfire Misinformation Presentation
Wildfire Misinformation Presentation Question Followup
The second video of the “education” seminar which we may discuss at a later date.
NOAA Central Library
2.45K subscribers
Some old information on John Cook
Follow me, Charles Rotter, on Twitter @crotter8
Your article about the dangers of disinformation is propagating a badly photoshopped image of a person and calling that person creepy to try to discredit them. A very weird and creepy tone to this article indeed.
The minor little problem is that John Cook is actually weird and creepy.
I don’t care much about Cook, the author of this article is just spreading disinformation while… decrying disinformation. Rather absurd.
I am decrying the concept of “disinformation”.
I am decrying the attempt to suppress ideas, any ideas, via government, credentialism, or so-called public private partnerships. Read slower. Think before typing.
That photoshop image resided on his “research” team’s forum, along with many other creepy images. It came from SKS. It’s fair game to use to ridicule SKS.
Yeah except you didn’t mention that anywhere in your article. Perfectly happy to have your readers believe, I dunno, disinformation? Anything to further your cause, right? If I had to come up with a term for such behavior I might call it “disinformation tactics” or somesuch.
Keep your Mirror handy
Actually you make a valid point. I used the wrong link in the first mention of Cook. I meant to use this one…now corrected.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/08/06/skeptcial-science-takes-creepy-to-a-whole-new-level/
I thought you were complaining about his image appearing in the sequence of posts about him at the end of the article, which give appropriate context.
My apologies, you were criticizing something of which I was unaware, and I defended the actions of which I was aware. A argument of misunderstanding, often the essence of which makes for the best comedy writing, but not in this case.
Again, the issue is now resolved.
Is that photo false? What is SKS?
The photo was a construct authored by Cook himself. SKS is really SkS (Sk)eptical (S)cience and used to about the true acronym
Skeptical
Science
SS
Oh, yuh- been there, done that. Their motto is to be skeptical of those who are skeptical of climate science. So one day I asked there if it’s OK to be skeptical of those who are skeptical of those who are skeptical of climate science. I was warned anymore comments like that and I’d be locked out. I don’t bother anymore. No sense of humor there. 🙂
https://www.climatechangecommunication.org/portfolio-view/john-cook/
He appears more presentable (and believable) in a NAZI uniform.
so a guy with a PhD in Cognitive Science supposedly can pontificate about others, including highly regarded, fully qualified, actual climate scientists?
The funny thing is, John Cook did the bad Photoshop of his own image himself! So he’s got no one to blame but the guy in the funhouse mirror.
My point is that it is quite ironic to post fakes images as though they are real with no context in a post about the dangers of disinformation in the climate debate.
Now that Mumbles McGuirck explained that Cook faked it himself- that doesn’t make me feel any better about Cook, who is NOT a climate scientist. Can you think of any skeptical climate scientists who have such a deranged, unprofessional, sense of humor? We should take him seriously? Your getting bent out of shape because Cook faking it wasn’t mentioned in disingenuous.
97% of those that see the photo in this post have/had seen it before & know what it is. As such, it is not a “fakes images as though they are real with no context in a post about the dangers of disinformation in the climate debate”, it is a follow up joke … from other visual jokes about the lying propagandist that is(was?) employed by the Melbourne Center for Behavior Change.
“Not very many people are going to see my disinformation” is not a good excuse for propagating disinformation. Charles has already acknowledged the misleading nature of his post and has made an attempt to edit it to be less misleading.
Alan, are you standing in for NickPick?
AlanJ,
Feel free to correct me if I am wrong but…
Wasn’t John Cook himself the creator of that “badly photoshopped image”?
Reading the links Charles provided at the end of his article, the images were uploaded to the Skeptical Science website user forum – anyone could have made and uploaded them.
Wait, are you … Skeptical? If so doesn’t that make you a … Denier??
Nah, just a NickPicker.
It was a secret private forum for his research team.
It was an implicit acknowledgement that he, and and his private forum buddies, are aware of their aspirations to equal one of the most well known propagandists of all time.
Whenever that image is shown it should be put in the correct context:
1) It was created by John Cook himself (or a colleague) and was kept on a private server at Skeptical Science.
2) As such it reflects how he sees himself.
3) It was one of a range of curious images that included a colleague of his as Dr Who. That person presumably thinks of the heroic science fiction hero in the same way as John Cook sees the Nazi party.
When considering the output of John Cook it is important to consider the moral integrity of his heroes.
1 and 2 are just fabrications unless you are in possession of some information that the rest of us are not. According to the link Charles posted above, the images were posted to a web forum on the Skeptical Science website. Anyone could have created and uploaded the images, and we have no context whatsoever for who it was or why.
The bottom line is that the image is not real, it is photoshopped. Posting the picture with a caption calling Cook “creepy” implies that the image is genuine. Charles himself acknowledged this above, and attempted to rectify the issue by replacing the link to the image with a link to a WUWT post showing the image with a bit of information about where it came from. So all of you in this thread arguing that it wasn’t blatantly misleading need to take up your cases with the author of this post.
AlanJ –
Nickpick 2.0
It was secured in a private area that was shared by a select few at the Skeptical Science website. Until the door was left open and a load of weird photos were found.
John Cook could see it. And he chose to leave it.
I, myself, would never make such an image of myself and would destroy any that a colleague made. Wouldn’t you?
John Cook would not. John Cook did not.
Therefore points 1 and 2 are self-evidently true.
It was in a publicly available folder on the web site – by definition not a “private server”
When it was scraped it became public, But it was private when the image was created. Which is the relevant point.
It surprises me how many people want to defend someone who has done this. It make me wonder if they are concerned that John Cook brings their party into disgrace.
And also I wonder, which is their party?
John Cook is a convenient Whipping Boy.
definitely a part of fast thinking response.
its part of skeptical iconography, their shroud of Turin
all of the baptised Skeptics Know to Shout Boo when They See His Photo.
you cant expect these religious icons to disappear
Cook, failed as a cartoonist…
Failed abjectly as a scientist…
So joined Lewindopey in his child-minded psyops games… attempting to use low-end psychology to push “climate change”… and is failing manifestly at that…
…because he is a total joke and anyone with any sense can see that… and laughs out loud. !
look a trained seal barks
youre trained to laugh,
and if they were failing you’d just ignore them and not stoop to ad homs.
Failed abjectly as a scientist…
Failure in academia is measured by citations and
others building on your work
take any skeptic: none has grad students
none has other people building on their work
i say mann, you say fraud…..Mann
i say model, you say flawed…. Model
i say cook, you say lewandosky Cook
I say Climate you say hoax, Climate.
i say skeptic, you say NPC, Skeptic
you cant escape the matrix or your programming
, skeptic
you cant escape the matrix or your programming
It appears that yours has developed several glitches.
I see you understand the whole problem of the Global Warming scam.
And accept that basically every aspect is a lie.
You know Mann was a fruad.
You know the models are flawed from the very ground up.
You know the Cook/Lewendopey paper is a complete farce
You even KNOW that so-called “Climate Change” is a complete hoax.
And here I was thinking you are paid to promote the whole facade !
And of course, anyone citing Cook’s work, marks themselves immediately as a propaganda patsy.
eg.. anyone citing that delusional 97% anti-science paper.
“Failed abjectly as a scientist…”
Do you have a houseful of mirrors ?
Take a good look everyday.?
Obviously, you are trained not to think. This comment is scary stupid. It is the duty of all those who know about Cook, Mann, Climate models, to call them out. It’s not ”programming” you twonk. Look at your own side if you want to see examples of programming. You can start with the UN head and work down from there.
Remember, Mosh is not “trained” as a scientist in any way.
Ended up purely as a mouthpiece/shill.
“you’re trained to laugh,”
And you are trained to write gibberish. !
Something for everyone to laugh at.
Oh what a load of garbage. Obviously you have no idea what whipping boy means.
Cook is not a whipping boy, he is a clown who makes ridiculous claims about consensus (which are both inaccurate and meaningless at the same time) and deserves every criticism he gets whenever he opens his mouth. It has nothing to do with tying him to the shortcomings of the general climate science narrative.
No Mosher, YOU are the whipping boy here. you step in to take the beating properly deserved by your lords. You tell yourself it’s a noble thing to do. At every stage you fail yet you continue to tie yourself to the pole.
You are nothing more than an object of ridicule. In comments below you proclaim how the “trained dog barks”….oh the irony. Bark little dog, bark. well, more like ‘yap’, tbh.
It wasn’t a photoshop if you are talking about the photograph that was in a public directory on his web page of Mr Cook in a WWII German uniform. He actually wore that, took the photograph and posted it on his page. No explanation, and to the best anyone can find he is not a military reenactor.
The story is not about the dangers of misinformation. It’s about the danger of people claiming that anything that deviates from their orthodoxy constitutes misinformation.
It’s photoshopped? How deceptive! I had no idea! But Cook is still a Stasi officer, right?
“The binary logic she employed creates a false narrative: you either believe climate change is primarily human-caused and catastrophic, or you are an ill-informed individual spreading ‘fake news’.”
The gradient for mean annual temperatures across the U.S. is roughly 1 degree F for every 40 miles.
Imagine all of humanity lives in the current climate of NYC. 3 degrees of warming would be the equivalent of moving everyone 120 miles south to Washington DC.
Personally, I don’t see how all of humanity would be wiped out by moving to the climate of Washington DC.
I must be too much of an Idiot to engage in the “slow thinking” that she is promoting!
I don’t mind idiots, they’re all around and often make life interesting. It’s the idiots that think they’re smart that I detest. Miss Information is worthy of your scorn.
anyone who Photoshops himself in a Nazi uniform is either a frat boy who isn’t getting laid- or an idiot 🙂
Corrections welcome but, as I recall, (as Charles mentioned up thread) it was a private forum only meant to be seen by those who support “The Cause”.
Someone accidently left it open and/or available to the public.
Especially since it was hidden- is the perfect reason to use it against him. But I can’t understand why those dedicated to “the cause” would find it funny either. They don’t seem like a humorous crowd.
people were calling him a nazi for deleting comments,
he probably thought it would be funny to dress as one
it wasnt left open.
imagine a directory structure like
forum/a1
forum/a2
forum/a3
somebody was clever and looked at forum/b6
and jackpot..
open yes.
left open? implies it was meant to be closed.
it was hidden. but not cleverly.
an embarassing episode
if you want to trigger people to be biased, its a perfect example
of how mis information works.
YAWN
Still trying to whitewash Cook’s nonsense.
Yes, you should be very embarrassed.
left open? implies it was meant to be closed.
No, it implies only that it was not closed. You can control access to directories rather easily. This one was apparently created “open” and not closed, therefore it was left open.
https://hiizuru.wordpress.com/2014/05/17/wanna-be-hackers/
So, NOT a hack, just an incompetent web site… called SkS. !
Mosh, thank you for the clarifications.
Oh no! We’re back to John Cook.
Please do not move any more people to Washington DC. There’s already too many people there and they are destroying the rest of the country…
plants and animals know better.
“plants and animals know better.”
Yep, they know that CO2 is absolutely essential for LIFE.
And is currently in rather short supply in the atmosphere.
Thank you sir/madam for that comment. It is the first comment that actually addresses the substance of Charles Rotter’s article. The first 40 or so comments were all about John Cook. In a way you have to admire AlanJ for his ability to steer the comments away from the substance of the article.
I appreciate the point you’re making, but please refrain from implying that the difference between the “climates” in Boston and Miami (or Chicago/New Orleans, or Seattle/San Diego) can be meaningfully measured by a few degrees in “average annual temperature”. You (and she) are really addressing the falsity of CAGW, not CACC (which is even more wildly ridiculous).
Anybody who needs Oreskes as her reference is a third rater who does not recognise another third rater.
Anybody who needs Oreskes as a citation reference begs for objective, unbiased investigation into whether anything Oreskes says on the climate issue actually has any merit, ranging from her claims about a 100% scientific consensus to how she allegedly discovered who the “merchants of doubt” were.
Meanwhile, the slide asking “How Do We Combat Misinformation?” which says ….
Should of course be retitled, “How Do We Regurgitate Misinformation?”
From the article: “The MDM team, according to one CISA official quoted in the IG report, “counters all types of disinformation,”
What disinformation has this group countered?
This is a joke. It’s all political.
Every one of these episodes is just another step in socialism’s “long march through the institutions”.
NOAA has clearly been taken.
It’s a write-off.
Rationality, credibility surrendered to mindless ideology.
From the article: “Furthermore, it seems that the argument is no longer about understanding the complexities of the Earth’s climate system, but about ‘breaking and fixing audience mental models.’”
That’s exactly what it is about. The Climate Change Alarmists can’t make their case to ban CO2 scientifically, so they fall back on trying mind control on the public. Climate Alarmists are becoming brainwashing experts, or at least, they are trying to do so.
The Climate Change Alarmists are trying to figure out the best way to sell their unreasonable fear of CO2 to the people.
If they can’t sell it to China, India, etc, it’s all for nought. The US no longer even spews enough CO2 to make a difference, given growth plans for carbon plants around the world.
That’s not the point. They don’t care what China and India do. Those in on the grift want to keep the grift going. It’s very lucrative – trillions of dollars. Follow the money. Oh they’ll talk about it like they care, but the real action is shaking down Western societies for large payoffs.
CO2 is not the end game. It is simply a tool. It is not really about climate. It is about control.
I thought she was going to address the misinformation about how wildfires are being falsely blamed on “climate change”, but all she was doing was referencing a Taylor Swift song. So no ‘wildfire lies’ were harmed in the making of this seminar. ROTFLMAO.
Did anybody catch the keynote address by Dr. Joseph Goebbels?
Nice post, CR. It’s all they have got left. Facts don’t fall their way.
“The war on beef is fully contrived.”
_____________________________________
And the war on dairy farms and rice paddies.
This is an important point Rud makes about methane because the Alarmists are trying to make methane out to be another dangerous greenhouse gas, and the only solution to get methane under control is for most of us to stop eating.
That’s no solution at all. And completely unnecessary. We don’t need a fix for methane, it is doing just fine without human intervention.
I would rather keep on eating. I find that if I watch what I eat I don’t produce too much methane.
Don’t forget the war on wood fired pizza..
Year-to-date fire data can be found here:
https://www.nifc.gov/fire-information/nfn#Idaho
January 1 to June 23
Fires: 22,277 . . . . Acres: 640,741
10-year average Year-to-Date
Fires: 25,197 . . . . . Acres: 1,510,227
Google Earth can be used to see fires in near real-time
https://www.kasiaandjason.com/Wildfire-activity
I mostly use the VIIRS 375m & 750m resolution: for USA
Speaking of methane, why aren’t they at war against indoor plumbing?
Every sink and toilet and drain has a “U” shaped trap that hold water to prevent sewer gases from entering the house. The plumbing systems also have a vent with no trap that allows the sewer gases to escape to the atmosphere. Without the vent the lines wouldn’t drain properly.
(Dip a straw in a glass of water, put your finger over the end and pull out the straw. The water won’t drain out of the straw.)
“Sewer gas” contains lots of GHGs!
Renewable intermittency can be overcome
… with nuclear power.
Actually, not so easily. Nucs do not like to be cycled. Nucs like to stay baseload full power for long periods.
CCGT can easily be cycled with almost no penalty except underutilized capital. The new GE 600-800 MW units run about 61% efficient at full load, 60% efficient at 80% load, and still 59% efficient at 40% load. They cannot run below 40% because there is not enough gas turbine exhaust heat to make minimum steam for the steam turbine.
The newish Fort Lauderdale CCGT is 3 600 MW GE gas turbines all feeding one 600MW steam turbine for a total at max output of 2400. It was designed to run baseload at about 2000-2200 (replacing the 2 old 1000 MW bunker oil fired steam turbines), with the spare peak load 200-400 replacing several old smaller gas peakers in three Broward County locations. Shutting those old peakers saved fuel, operations, and maintenance.
Rud, I recently heard a talk from a retired navy offficer who ran nuclear ships and said the nucs driving US ships can run low power while crusing and quickly power up when the captian wants full speed. He did not give time nor depth of off peak. Maybe someone on this site has data.
I was a deck hand on a escort ship that did plane guard duty while on WesPac in SE Asia back in the early 70’s. I was on the bridge when we were with the Enterprise. We had a difficult time keeping up when they turned into the wind to launch planes. It was nuclear powered. Very stressful time for the officer of the deck, total radio silence/blacked out eg no lights, the command came in
via flashing signal lights, the move in formation had to be done
from memory, eg giving orders to the helmsman ect. I also was
on the bridge when CGN-25 pulled their control rods from very low
speed next to us. What a beast .
I was told they recently had gotten out of
the yards after cracking the hull from excessive power. Story
was they had to change their screws to something less aggressive.
Propulsion reactors I’ve been told are a different type than ele power types.
We would be at 10-15 knots on station to max speed for flight operations, 30+ knots..
Viewing on YouTube there were no comments so I left one:
_________________________________________________
METHANE
The global warming potential numbers that have appeared in all six IPCC assessment reports say that methane is so many times more powerful than a similar mass of CO2 at trapping heat. Recently, in the IPCC’s AR6, that number is 82.5 times more powerful than CO2 at trapping heat.
BUT the statement is unfinished. Policy makers need to know how much methane will actually run up global temperature, and nowhere in the IPCC reports or most anywhere else are we ever told how much that temperture rise is likely to be.
In other words, the GWP numbers leave out the important information.
Leaving out important information is misinformation.
If I had to guess, I don’t think those YouTube videos will still be up next week. I’ve downloaded them.
Thanks. What’s your opinion on the war on cattle ranchers, rice paddies and dairy farms because they emit methane?
It’s bullshit.
Methane’s thermal conductivity is about three times that of CO2. Of the gases it gets rid of “heat” very quickly.
The range of the IR spectrum that methane responds to is entirely covered by water vapour, so has ZERO potential to increase temperatures. WV is variable, but usually in the range of 2-4% of the atmosphere, or 20,000-40,000 ppm. Methane, 1.8 ppm.
I researched this a while ago. The global average specific humidity is just about 2%. Low at the poles and a few big deserts, just over 4% in most of the tropics most of the time.
Steve, The missing information is that there is little of it. 1.7ppm vs. 420 ppm for CO2. Haper says this causes .05 degree C for doubling, .06 with feedback.
Haper says this causes .05 degree C for doubling,
_____________________________________________
Thanks, I’m adding that one to the file. Do you have a link for that?
looks like the US government is learning from China!
The radical Democrats like the Chicom Model of government.
Joe is trying to figure out how to make himself president for life.
Joe can’t figure out which feet to put his shoes on.
He’s there as a (barely) animated billboard for the far left Democrat party string-pullers.
The faceless cabal who determine and inflict socialist policies.
It is such an irony that he right accuse Biden of being senile, but also seem to think he is capable of fraud so clever that to date there is no evidence that can indict him. So which is it, because it really can’t be both.
LOL.. you really think Biden has dreamt up the fraud..
Heck even gets his cue cards wrong.
As said… he is semi-animated billboard for the far-left Democrat party string-pullers.
I think you may need to read what I wrote again……
Why? It was an incoherent rambling mess.
Pertaining to nothing.
No, clearly you didn’t understand what I wrote… and not for the first time.
No, one does not accuse the other of demonstrating a decline in cognitive function. There is no irony in this context.
It is an observation, and it is a valid observation, the mental decline in Biden is demonstrably obvious.
Stay tuned, Simon. The evidence is coming out in the open.
Hunter Biden made so much money he thought $5 million was just a “quibble” among business associates.
What was Hunter selling that was so valuable, one has to wonder.
It’s clear that the Democrats are subverting government in order to hide Joe Biden’s corruption, and weaponizing government to attack their political opponents.
Our Constitutional Republic is under attack from the radical Democrats. Did you hear that slumbering Republicans? Of course, not all Republicans are slumbering, but too many don’t seem to see the existential threat the radical Democrats pose to our system of government. Wake up, Mitch/RINO’s. It’s not business as usual anymore. Come together or lose the war to the radical Democrats/Marxists.
“Joe can’t figure out which feet to put his shoes on.”
Yeah, I should have said “Joe’s handlers”. 🙂
OK Tom I’m going to call you on that. Have you got a quote, a link, anything that implies or states that Biden wants to be president for life? And actually I seem to recall Trump suggesting that should be a path for the US…..
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/trump-says-maybe-u-s-will-have-a-president-for-life-someday
President until full-on dementia sets in.
Not long now !
Dementia you say…..So he’s not the evil corrupt full on immoral guy the right says he is? How could he be. Unless the dementia thing is him being really cunning?
Speaking of immoral, my money is on Trump going to jail now. It’s hard to see the latest recordings not nailing his arse.
Poor Simon. Foot in mouth again.
Biden’s whole life has been one of corruption and deceit.
His dementia makes it harder and harder to hide that.
“Biden’s whole life has been one of corruption and deceit.”
I wonder if you could help me… could you list the crimes he has been convicted of, or maybe charged with?
Shall I list Trump’s so we can compare?
“Shall I list Trump’s so we can compare?”
Please do, and do so in the next Open Thread available, so we can discuss it at length (this article is getting too old).
No evidence there was a actually a classified document..
Did the “reporter” actually see it,.. or was Trump just waving around a magazine article..
“off the record”… “if this was a “classified” document, I could have declassified it.”
Try again. !
A. He admits the paper he has in his hands is classified.
B. He admits he could have declassified it but now he’s not president he can’t.
So … clearly it was no magazine article, unless there are classified magazine articles. And why would he talk about declassifying a magazine article? Ludicrous…
That in anyones book is game set and match….
And just to make it worse, he’s now trying to say he was lying (bravado). Honestly the guy has not an ounce of honesty in his body.
Nope, he’s toast and any neutral jury doing their duty will convict him. He’s going from “con man” to “con vict.”
That’s a laugh……
So you think a jury in his home town wont be neutral. I agree, they will be on his side. Shall we move it to New York?
No, he waved a paper and said, as an illustration, that it was classified. (it was an off-the-record comment, btw, so was an illegal recording)
You have zero evidence that it actually was a classified document.
Secondly, he admitted that papers that weren’t already declassified, he couldn’t declassify.
You are still totally empty of any actual evidence of wrong-doing.
Just like every other farce CONCOCTED by the demonrats.
You want total lack of honesty.. look at Biden, Obama, Clinton, and basically every other current Demonrat.
That is absolutely proven.
Yes, Trump says there was no classified document presented in this incident. He was talking about classified documents, but he wasn’t showing anyone a classified document.
This should be easy to prove, one way or another.
“This should be easy to prove, one way or another.”
I agree….
“You have zero evidence that it actually was a classified document.”
It’s on the recording. Here are Trumps words…
“This was done by the military and given to me, See as president I could have declassified it,” Trump says. “Now I can’t, you know, but this is still a secret.”
And no doubt Jack Smith has tracked down the person in the room who thought him sharing state secrets was so funny. I wonder if Donald still thinks being so cavalier with state secrets is such a big joke?
“Speaking of immoral, my money is on Trump going to jail now.”
Wishful thinking, Simon. I bet you thought the same thing every time Trump has been accused of something.
“It’s hard to see the latest recordings not nailing his arse.”
It’s easy for me to see this is not a problem for him. The prosecutor wants to give the impression that Trump was waving around a classified document under the nose of someone who had no security clearance.
But Trump says there was no classified document in this case and the documents he is referring to in the audio recording were newspaper articles and other unclassified documents.
So that ought to be very easy to prove in court. Trump was either waving a classified document around in front of people who should not see such a document, or he was not waving such a document around. And you can’t tell that from an audio recording, which you think/hope is damaging.
This particular witchhunt is going to end up just like all the other Democrat witchhunts going after Trump: Trump will be found innocent.
The radical Democrats are the criminals, not Trump.
Trump still leads all Republican presidential candidates by an enormous amount. It looks like he is going to be the nominee, indictments or no indictments, and despite the Never Trumpers working so hard to trash Trump.
I’m voting for Trump if given a chance, and it looks like I will have that chance.
And these Never Trumpers and some presidential candidates say “If these charges against Trump are true, then they are very serious!”
Put on the brakes!!! Did you hear what you just said? “If these charges are true”.
How many times in the past have charges against Trump proven to be true? Zero times. Given that track record, shouldn’t you assume the charges are NOT true, until shown to be otherwise? Of course, you should. Any fair individual would do that. But of course, Never Trumpers and some presidential candidates are not here to be fair, are they.
One trumped up charge after another against Trump fails, yet the tendency of some is to believe Trump’s accusers before believing Trump.
I’m sticking with the most innocent guy in American politics: Donald Trump.
“How many times in the past have charges against Trump proven to be true?”
Do you really want a list. He’s been impeached twice for starters. And there are numerous charges pending.
He’s been impeached twice for starters.
Really, Simon, you’re going with “impeachment” = “proof”?
Impeachment proves nothing, just like an indictment proves nothing. It’s nothing more than a formal accusation. Do you really not understand that?
And there are numerous charges pending.
Same for this. Or do you believe that everyone charged with a crime is guilty of said crime?
“proven to be true” was the request. Your answer shows you have nothing.
“Speaking of immoral, my money is on Trump going to jail now.”
Wishful thinking, Simon.
… wishful thinking (on Simon’s part) that Simon actually owns any money.
“… wishful thinking (on Simon’s part) that Simon actually owns any money.”
What a silly comment
Just trying to keep up to your level.
“But Trump says there was no classified document in this case and the documents he is referring to in the audio recording were newspaper articles and other unclassified documents.”
So why does Trump say…
“He said that I wanted to attack Iran, Isn’t it amazing?” Trump says as the sound of papers shuffling can be heard. “I have a big pile of papers, this thing just came up. Look. This was him. They presented me this – this is off the record but – they presented me this. This was him. This was the Defense Department and him.”
He’s not talking about newspaper articles. Why would the defence department give him newspaper articles? And he says they are classified. Newspaper articles aren’t classified.
I find it more illustrative to refer to the pResident as “Joe Biden” (use the Quotes!). Kinda visualizes the attached puppet strings and the concept of remote control by some heinous group of demons.
I have some Biden quotes, Simon, but I can’t make any sense out of them.
Tom, I agree that Biden says some silly stuff and maybe he is loosing it. I’m on the record here saying I hope he doesn’t run and that his best years are gone. But any suggestion that he is as crooked as Trump is just nonsense. There has not been a president in US history who has faced so much scrutiny (legitimately I say) because of how he acts and what he does. He is a con man and crook and this document stuff is the most serious thing he has faced. From here he has only two hopes.
Beyond that he is toast.
Joe is angling to be President of the world with the UN as his attack dog.
Don’t forget that Bill Gates will be helping him.
Joe and the other radical Democrats are angling to turn the United States into a one-party system by hook or by crook. They like the Chinese communist model of government.
The radical Democrats haven’t resorted to outright murder, as far as I know, but they are doing just about everything else they can legally and illegally, to try to overthrow the system and put it in their hands in perpetuity.
If Joe Biden is the Democrat nominee in 2024, I’ll be surprised. I think the hammer is getting ready to fall on Joe, and one of these days his family will announce that Joe’s medical condition will not allow him to serve as president any longer.
Joe’s handlers will hope this will stop any further criminal investigations or prosecutions of Joe. And that may do the trick.
But then, we and the Democrats are stuck with that imbecile, Kamala Harris. Maybe she will resign, too. She is certainly not up to the job.
“Democrats haven’t resorted to outright murder”
That’s a moot point considering the convenient deaths surrounding the Clintons.
How likely is it that (since the Clinton era) msm would actually report malfeasance in politically convenient deaths? Plus, would you trust the FBI’s word that “it was a heart attack, nothing to see here”?
There are other options. I saw the guy Newsom being interviewed by Hannity. He was very impressive.
now, that there is silly.
His point by point fact based rebuts left Sean with only inchoate sputtering. I especially liked his eager acceptance of a debate with Governor DeSantis on Mr. Hannity’s show. So far Governor DeSantis has wisely responded with crickets…
Why would the CCP need to propagandise it’s population, especially as Chinese citizens are free to travel the world as they please? Go to Harrods in London some day, it’s one of their favourite stores to visit and they arrive by the busload.
Meanwhile, the west is subject to propaganda on climate change, covid, masks, lockdowns, ‘vaccinations’, Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, Donald Trump, BLM, LGBTQ+, antifa, Ukraine, FBI, CIA, DOJ etc.
I’m prepared to bet there’s no equivalent to the BBC in China spreading daily climate scare stories to terrorise it’s population with claims that we only have 5 years left……
I have noticed a pattern in the way climate alarmists use language. It is characterized by dishonesty, lies and deceit interwoven with truths. Science should be concerned with whether something is true or false or simply a hypothesis that still needs to be tested. If someone says that CO2 is plant food and significantly raised levels will do good not harm this can be empirically tested and confirmed.
We have no easy way to test what raised temperatures will do to a certain environment. There are too many complexities so we have to depend on careful observations and measurements over many years to confirm a particular climate hypothesis. Consider the influence of clouds on weather and climate. Are we able to accurately include these in models? I do not believe so. Recently with a spell of warmer weather – at last – I saw how quickly the temperature fell by over 3ºC when low Cumulus clouds filled the clear sky. How much of this was because of the clouds and how much because of the breeze that brought the moist air? If a particular area experiences higher than expected temperatures for some weeks how will this influence weather patterns and ultimately the climate? Do we know enough to give a definitive answer? I think not.
Climates are constructs.
Indicative of possible periodic situations certainly, but nothing you can bank on.
Weather is all that is observable and actually experienced.
Variable behaviors, but enough observable patterns to be useful in planning for advantage and avoidance.
We should never fool ourselves that we can confidently nail down what any climates (30-year weather behaviors) in any areas will be like.
Nor is a global temperature rise, or fall, climate. It’s temperature.
I happened to “sample” the video around the 27 to 28 minute mark, where she was explaining that “scientists who disagree do not have expertise in climate science”.
I was taught that as the specific “poisoning the well” logical fallacy.
Also, I would love to see her (/ them) try making that “argument” to someone like Dr. Richard Lindzen.
The whole “Trust us, we are (climate) scientists (/ experts)” doesn’t work, with me at least.
It’s just variations of the generic “appeal to (self-declared) authority” logical fallacy.
I’m always curious about what disciplines a scientist has to have mastered to be qualified as a “climate scientist”.
Surely it has to be quite a combined array of fields including such disciplines as meteorology, fluid dynamics, mathematics, statistics, atmospherics, physics, chemistry, thermodynamics, geology, oceanography, hydrology, biology, to name but a few.
Or can anyone with a basic competence in Excel and WoodForTrees have at it, and call themselves a “climate scientist”?
Mike Mann does not even have that minimum competence, yet he is considered a great climate scientist who produced a famous (but wrong) hockey stick. He flunked out of graduate physics so became a climate proxyologist.
“climate proxyologist.”
oops…. I read that as “proctologist”.
Or is that what you meant to type ?
A climate proctologist?
One with his head up his arse, like M. Mann?
If he flunked out of physics, that would
be consistent with his mathematical
ineptitude, actually.
to me it is obvious that this is not entirely about ‘Climate Change’ but about ‘People’ change in order to take us in the direction of one world government control. The book ‘1984’ really addresses this issue but most still ridicule the idea. Those who disagree with social issues are all ‘phobs’ of some kind. it will be the case in Climate change as well. When the thumb of government is pushing hard on you, you either yield or face condemnation and persecution!
There are several ways to identify misinformation. Apparently it is anything that is exposed by “right wing extremists”. And you don’t need a slide show to identify a right wing extremist. Perhaps the woman in this video should be considered for running one of the new “Misinformation” posts in the current administration. https://youtube.com/shorts/AvFmIFSs5QE?feature=share4
I recently saw something along those lines put this way.
Question : What is the difference between “a conspiracy theory” and “a verified fact” ?
Answer : Around 5 or 6 years.
Around 5 or 6 years.
Weeks, now
Is this equation correct?
Consensus = lack of evidence
According to Michael Crichton it was more like :
Consensus ≠ Science, Consensus = Politics.
See also : “Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.” — Richard Feynman
See also the late Dr S Fred Singer, who said “science is not a show of hands,” likely much to the ire of Naomi Oreskes who, months later, famously got her “100% scientific consensus” paper published at Science magazine.
Mark BLR,
Readers will get more value from Richard Feynman’s writings by reading his books rather than by showing an occasional short quote.
He was a really smart guy, with a capacity to convert complex problems to a simpler essence. There is much value in trying to work out his mental logic to go from complex to simpler.
The better scientists I have met often have similar ability. I suspect that one can learn to think that way. Geoff S
Kudos to Charles Rotter, as this article was very important and necessary, as is our response.
Having spent several hours watching on Youtube the May 24/25 National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine “Truth, Trust and Hope” Nobel Prize Summit, I can attest that there is a very open, proud, and loud conspiracy to shut down freedom of expression that is being promoted by leading social scientists, the EU, the US, and is financed by the WEF.
The oligarchic WEF influence is overbearing and selfish. They call themselves stakeholders and they believe their prerogatives are more important than those of the greater population.
It is a great big con, the culmination of a decades long ‘inception’-like indoctrination program.
It’s very much like how Scientology works, where the leadership creates ‘tech’ that must be exactly followed, and if not, the miscreant misbehaving wrong-thinker gets ‘ethics’ remediation.
In this case the ‘tech’ is the IPCC emissions-based climate control that must be adhered to, and the managers are the oligarchs who finance both the climate and social media ‘tech’, the political class, the academic class, with the social media giants now who are openly expected to obey the oligarchs & politicians by enforcing their climate ‘tech’ with social media ‘tech’.
The ‘ethics’ remediation in the climate venue are the NOAA and climate.gov etal efforts to combat wrongthink, ‘misinformation’, by the use of manipulative push polls, by restrictions on social media, by nonstop every day climate propaganda and hand-wringing over inaction, all with the puffed up sense of urgency that goes with virtue-signalling and world-saving ‘action’.
This is all going to backfire because it is now clear who is incapable of ‘slow-thinking’ – them.
What is wrong with this statement & image from climate.gov? [hint: the units don’t match]
The natural CO2 sinks in 2021 were 24 times greater than all man-made emission sources, so their statement I quoted above is completely false. Their messaging counted on you to infer that the 0.97 correlation seen between total measured CO2 and emissions meant that man-made emissions were the main thing driving total atmospheric CO2 upwards (they didn’t).
When emissions and total measured CO2 (Law Dome and Mauna Loa) are put on the same scale by converting the measured CO2 in ppm into gigatons by multiplying ppm by 7.80432, a much different story quickly emerges, a very much diminished emissions portion of the whole:
Nature provided 98.9% of the total gigatons of CO2, man-made emissions were 1.1% in 2021.
The total sum of man-made emissions doesn’t add up to any one year of measured CO2!
In 2021, every ppm of man-made emissions was swamped by 86 ppm from other sources.
The 63-year trend rate in net Mauna Loa CO2 increased 560 times faster than emissions.
They shamelessly compared apples to oranges by failing to perform proper unit analysis.
Therefore, they have given no one any reason to believe in human-caused warming!
Thanks for that comment Bob . The Mauna Loa measurements are often taken as proof positive of man’s catastrophic contribution to CO 2 in the atmosphere regardless of well reasoned skeptical position arguments relating to CO2 such as small proportionality, limited effective molecular range, heat movement in atmosphere and all the other natural limiting factors we talk about here.
So long as aCO2 keeps rising, that’s all that matters.
…. FEEDING the world’s plant life 🙂
If the woman can’t express herself without flailing her arms and hands,
perhaps she should sit on them.
Here is Rosemary Clooney, showing how not to get in your own way when presenting:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvrJpVblXn4
Dis-information panels are only necessary because climate debate has been stifled for the last 15 years.
Turning Al Gore’s horrendously anti-science claim “The debate is over” into policy didn’t and doesn’t change anyone’s mind.
Cognitive efforts and slow thinking as presented by Margaret Orr is equal to Pavlovs dogs – or to say For whom the Bell Tolls. What they are doing is basically the opposite of Ebbinghaus Forgetting Curve from 1885. By using the “five-tabel” with words – 5,10, 15, one hundred – they/them want us to store CC and Co2 as a bad thing. They dont want us to challenge our memories … they want to, as many in here probably knows, fabricate them by telling the same story over and over and over again. It´s like the titel on Barry Glasners book “The Culture of Fear”.
Is climate science an easy topic to understand, no, C.P. Snows books “The two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution” and it´s sequel “second look” demonstrates very well why many people react to headlines.
An interesting question when it comes to “cognitive efforts” and “slow thinking” has been asked by the pseudoscienst Yuval Noah Harari from WEF. “What to do with all those useless people”.
For know the answer is, bombard all of us with mis- and disinformation. Over time ratifies MAID as it is in Canada worldwide where everyone more or less can recieve active euthanasia if they´ve broken their index finger or “worse”. That´s what´s coming.
To make a long comment short, Yuval Noah Harari from WEF, have actually said the truth by saying: “Science is about power not the truth.
I wonder why this is not the headline, it wont be labelled as either mis- or disinformation … with the lessons from Ebbinghaus forgetting curve in mind why doesn´t MSM post this quote, well I think we all know why, what we all – us slow thinkers – can do, is to post this “quote” over and over and over again on social medias and thereby create a reverse burden of proof.
Orr’s slide about “misinformation” fails to include System 3, more effective than either of the other two:
System 3: Observational processing
Requires both observations, and the cognitive effort to understand and interpret the observations
“Realist” or (in the true meaning of the word) “scientific” thinking
Observational processing is pretty much the definition of ‘system 2’.
They have lots of misguided company.
story tips
Wells Fargo Investor Seeks Files in Probe Over Fake Interviews for Diverse Candidates (yahoo.com)
Good riddance, ‘ESG’ (yahoo.com)
Here is a chance to participate in the witch-hunt:
https://www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/understanding-and-addressing-misinformation-about-science
“Science” attempting to inoculate itself from humans that carry the disease known as FTTFO. – Free To Think For Oneself.
It demonstrates a fundamental insecurity that has developed within science, that inward focused obsession with self, with science. Science now sees a need to turn its attention the individual, or groups of individuals that spread “misinformation”.
Science has become dogmatic ideology, a religion. Now the subjective human must be dealt with to ensure sciences’ omnipotence.
Do we dare even suggest that this “research” was commissioned by the faceless bureaucrats, the central planning machine? Is that “misinformation”?
Now science will define for all of us, what misinformation and disinformation are. Science will “measure” the subjective cognitive response (because science believes it can measure everything, everywhere, in all dimensions) to itself, the “experts” will research this human malaise of Heterodox V1. FTTFO and science will design countermeasures to eradicate the disease that inflicts the skeptic. — However, all of it will fail.
One aspect of Orr’s seminar, which demands scrutiny, is the argument about ‘slow thinking’. The idea suggests that individuals who don’t subscribe to the catastrophic narrative aren’t applying enough cognitive effort to understand the issue.
gosh this misses the whole point of the Slide which just summarizes nobel laureate
Kahneman
https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/0374533555
is does take effort to understand these things, like reading Kahnemans work
He Also ran Blog where Climate Literati met to argue
as for John Cook.
hes a convient Whipping Boy, but people, like her, are writing their dissertations on his work.
This is How a reputation is built up.
you do work
other people decide its worthy enough to build on
“other people decide its worthy enough to build on”
Only worthy because it reinforces their pre-conceived ideology..
Nothing Cook has published actually has any scientific worth.
It would be like building on a mix of quicksand and sewage.
or obtaining useless patent(s) in the hopes of future govt regs making them valuable.
Most scientific work is unreplicable garbage. Probably close to 100% of climate ”findings” are garbage based on unproven hypotheses.
Retractions Australia….
”One estimate suggests about one in every 50 published papers has evidence of deliberate manipulation; other scientists have even gone as far as claiming “most published research findings are false”.”
Mosher is just another member of the church of climate believers. If you’re not sceptical of everything, you’re an idiot.
“but people, like her, are writing their dissertations on his work.”
Just shows that she is not any sort of scientist, but a straight-out propagandist.
Not a good look !
Getting a degree in Climate Change Communications is a degree in ‘HowTo’ Propaganda. It requires little (to zero) actual technical-scientific knowledge of the subject (Climate Change atmospherics and physics of energy budgets in this case), and only knowledge of behavioral psychology, sociology of groups and how to form GroupThink, and how to interact with modern forms of mass media communications to push out a crafted propaganda message.
The basic tenet of all successful propaganda is to start with trivial truths, and then weave in carefully concocted lies and half-truths (leaving out info that is counter to the narrative). When you get detractors/skeptics, then you can point to obvious basic truths and call your skeptic a “denier” of basic facts. Then you set up echo chambers, exclusive groups whereby the only invited members, especially of the media, are those susceptible to the message through their own biases.
This “echo chamber” tactic is exactly what Obama’s Deputy Nat Sec Advisor did in 2015-2016 to sell the bad Iranian Nuclear Deal to a subservient press by framing the false narratives within truths to a willing-to-be-lied-to audience of carefully selected journalists. Ben Rhodes admitted several years later this “echo chamber” is what he did as a trained communications specialist, someone with no prior experience in national security, foreign affairs, nuclear non-proliferation, or economic sanctions before leading the efforts of the National Security Council to deceive the public on the Obama Iranian nuclear deal, a deal whose true purpose was to transfer billions of dollars to the Iranian mullahs.
So Miss Orr is merely a communications specialist, a specialist in How To Do propaganda on Climate Change. Her knowledge of physics, thermodynamics, weather systems, and climate patterns is essentially zero. Indeed, an actual scientist would be put-off by the imposition of Appeal to Authority narratives within their field of study. The agenda is of course paramount in climate communications, and agenda to spread fear to a duped public to acquire more political power and control via a public willing to trade economic security and personal freedoms for a false security over bad weather.
History shows that “Misinformation” is always the claimed culprit by tyrants who wants to indoctrinate and control the population. There is NO exception.
Are there any sanctuary cities to escape agency overreach and official misinformation pogroms?
Yeah, but they all tend to have ‘unofficial’ misinformation programs.
How about towing an old oil rig into international waters and declaring it an independent state?
Ms Orr is claimed to be a “climate scientist,” but is she? First, she is merely a 23 year old graduate student, not a seasoned professional.
While she does have a BS in meteorology (2020) and MS in geography (2022), a good start, her career path apparently took a turn somewhere along the way to focus on psychology and communication. So yes, she should be capable technically to comprehend the pure science, but she has been derailed by her passion for Psy Ops.
It is apparent that she is not a rigorous scientist and has not the experience or maturity to have independently questioned or analyzed the basis for the “climate change emergency” narrative. Yet here she is giving lectures to NASA.
So she was born ~2000, got her BS in 2020 and MS in 2022 and has had time enough since for her career path to “turn”.
That’s quite impressive
By teaming with the likes of Cook and Orr, who are pure activist…
NOAA has proven beyond a shadow of doubt that they are only interested in propaganda and mal-information.
This is essentially their “Bud Light” moment !
You never want to go full Orwell.
A post attacking NOAA from a site prominently featuring an NOAA data set on its front page.
Whatever next?
Comprehension a problem for you? Or do you just have nothing to say?
Both !
If you search Climate Audit blog for “Shukla’s gold” you will find a number of serious allegations of irregular financial manipulations in the George Mason University climate cell.
Does anyone know what the present status is? Geoff S.
I’m very skeptical of the quality of any of the degrees handed out over the last decade. A lot of the rigor is gone even in STEM
AOC has a degree in economics.
She could be the posterchild for your comment.
Dismantle NOAA and start over, at this point they are not worth saving.
where she prescribed a singular perspective on climate change, with little room for debate or dissent.
oh there is plenty of room for Debate, but no room for Denial or Misinformation.
Yet that is all your climate-kook comrades have…
Denial of natural climate variability,.. Denial of solar activity… Denial of ocean effects
Denial of REALITY
… and heaps and heaps of mal-information. !
“oh there is plenty of room for Debate, but no room for Denial or Misinformation.”
In other words, “The Science is Settled”?
“The Debate is Over” if you don’t agree with “The Science is Settled”?
‘… and “misinformation” is defined as that specific information which lends credence to my opponents’ Debate stance.’
You and all the rest ….
https://youtu.be/I6mpHW3SMcc?t=53
A blocked hurricane west of Central America will cause a strong drop in surface temperatures in the area, and a tropical storm is making its way over land.
Alas Monash University (Melbourne, Australia, ranked 44 in Times Higher Education) is now to be the beneficiary of John Cook’s expertise with it’s soon to be released “Climate Genie Project” Climate Genie Project – Climate Change Communication Research Hub due to launch mid 2023. (? story tip)
From the Climate Genie site “Imagine a world void of climate change misinformation. Where media outlets report on climate change diligently, accurately and without bias. Where the general public is accurately informed, and through which, can contribute to democratic decision-making.”
Apparently this will be a web extension that provides an automated fact-check of online climate change misinformation “highlighting potential misinformation and providing a pop-up message with details regarding the ‘types’of myths and ‘techniques’ being used to mislead.
Meanwhile the Australian Government is drafting a “Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation Bill” to tackle the threat of misinformation and disinformation “to the safety and wellbeing of Australians, as well as to our democracy, society, and economy.” New ACMA powers to combat misinformation and disinformation | Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts (Submissions close August 6, 2023)
Looks like I need to reread Orwell’s 1984 to find out what’s likely to happen next. It all feels rather surreal.
story tip?
Solar Panels… Meet hail storm… OOPS !
Huge Nebraska Solar Park Completely Smashed To Pieces By One Single Hail Storm! (notrickszone.com)
Story Tip: The Entire East Coast is shrouded in a haze of Canadian Smoke. Millions of acres are burnings. Each tree burned represents thousands of pounds of CO2 pumped into the atmosphere at an extremely rapid pace, What will be the impact on atmospheric CO2? Absolutely nothing. WUWT should create a page to highlight how even such extreme natural events as massive forest fires and volcanoes will have no impact on the trend in atmospheric CO2. They should also highlight how the economic collapses of 2008 and 2020 did absolutely nothing to alter the trend in CO2 either. Point being, if massive forest fires can’t alter the atmospheric CO2, what makes people think EVs and cutting down coal burning coal plants can?
Canada Sees Record CO2 Emissions From Fires So Far This Year
Wildfires in Canada have generated record CO2 emissions
Hundreds of forest fires since early May have generated nearly 600 million tonnes of CO2, equivalent to 88 percent of the country’s total greenhouse gas emissions from all sources in 2021, the Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring Service (CAMS) reported.
The point is, the forest fires could be 100%+ of Cdn CO2 emissions and it STILL wouldn’t alter the atmosphere’s CO2 level. (Nor planetary temperatures.)
But dumb headlines do scare the non-logical reader.
Slide 18 of the Powerpoint presentation is titled “How Do We Combat Misinformation?”, and the first bullet-point is :
• Check the sources of information
This weekend my semi-random sampling of the Internet included visiting the (bookmarked) Zero Hedge “aggregator” website.
While principally used as a “I need to have something to laugh at every day, otherwise I’ll go (completely) mad …” input, my reactions to individual ZH articles typically include :
1) Bwahahahahahah !
2) That counts as ‘interesting’ … CUB (*) obviously, but ‘interesting’ nevertheless …
3) That one’s actually mostly correct … isn’t it ???
(*) CUB = Complete and Utter B*ll*cks.
Reaction 3 will (usually, if I’m not feeling too lazy that day …) lead me to check elsewhere with multiple “reliable” sources that the article isn’t being exaggerated too much by the journalists / editors (cf the Graun).
The ZH website, along with others in the same vein, are a constant reminder to me that “the source” doesn’t matter.
What does matter is the answer to the question :”Is it true (or not) ?”
– – – – –
This weekend ZH linked had a copy of an article by Jeffrey Tucker at “The Epoch Times” website —- full title “The Great Debate That Will Not Happen” —- about the reactions to a challenge by Joe Rogan to host a “civil debate” between Peter Hotez and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. about the (theorised) dangers of vaccination in general, and the “cost-benefit” analysis of COVID-19 vaccinations to young people in particular.
That article included the following musings of Jeffrey Tucker around the subject :
Notes
1) I like to think of myself as both “reasoned” and (above all) “curious”, and usually include links to sources (~= “fact-filled”), but I am most definitely not “calm and unfailingly kind to my critics”.
2) In the climate change “debate” the “belligerent opponents” have been “winning” against people with “a real command of facts, theories, and real experience” for at least 25 years now (e.g. Bjorn Lomborg, Roy Spencer and John Christie, Richard Lindzen, Judith Curry, …).
3) On the subject of “climate change / science” my opinion is that believing that “the trajectory of public opinion is turning ferociously against” the media talking heads is just wishful thinking on “our” part.
Great article Charles! There is truly a battle for how the public engages with climate science. For many many years people like John Cook eagerly defile good scientific critical thinking, instead pushing group think to promote their agendas. Countering dishonest propaganda is why WUWT is so very very valuable.
This link is to the NOAA page on sea level rise:
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-sea-level
On future sea level rise it says:
“As global temperatures continue to warm, additional sea level rise is inevitable. How much and by when depends mostly on the future rate of greenhouse gas emissions.”
–
How come that if greenhouse gas emissions have risen continually there can be any period in which sea level has dropped? Or is sea level rise and fall not driven by greenhouse gas emissions?
I can see that the rate of rise might vary but for an actual drop to occur does that not mean something other than greenhouse gas emissions is a greater force.
A graph comparing carbon dioxide ppm over the sea level might be useful if some of you clever chaps can do it.
–