climatechangedispatch--2020-07-07--Climate Alarmists Ramp Up Calls To Throw Climate Realists In Jail

Written by Anthony Watts on .
Posted in Latest news Unable to win the debate in the court of public opinion , climate activists are increasingly calling for the imprisonment of climate realists .
The latest example is an article in Carbon Brief titled “ How climate change misinformation spreads online.
” The authors , who are all University of Exeter professors , advocate fines and imprisonment for people publishing “ climate misinformation ” online .
They justify their call for imprisonment by claiming tremendous harm from “ misleading information that is created and spread with intent to deceive.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ take is that those who publish what the Left deems as “ misinformation ” are actually publishing what might be dubbed “ inconvenient truths.
” The 2006 film by Al Gore of the same name is a case in point .
Gore , not being particularly good at details , published a boatload of misinformation in that film , and social media responded to correct the record .
In one scene , Gore used an animated clip of a polar bear in danger of drowning , trying to get onto a tiny ice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ warming .
Gore cited this as the new normal of drowning polar bears .
The reality ?
Scientists documented one drowned polar bear at sea after an intense storm , something that hasn ’ t been seen since .
According to an Associated Press article : “ A federal wildlife biologist whose observation in 2004 of presumably drowned polar bears in the Arctic helped to galvanize the global warming movement has been placed on administrative leave and is being investigated for scientific misconduct , possibly over the veracity of that article.
” Social @ @ @ @ @ @ @ problems with Gore ’ s polar bear claims , and they were proven right .
Then there ’ s the claim Gore made about Mt .
Kilimanjaro losing its ice cap due to “ global warming.
” Again , social media was the first to point out that what was really happening was a consequence of deforestation around the base of the mountain making less water vapor available by the process of trees releasing water into the atmosphere .
Without as much water vapor causing replenishing snows , the ice simply dried up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And finally , Gore made the bold claim in 2009 that the Arctic ice cap might be gone in five years .
Again , social media was the first to point out the problems with this claim .
To this day , the Arctic ice cap remains , and Gore no longer references any of those claims he once made .
If it weren ’ t for social media , we ’ d still be hearing about these .
The media choose not to subject alarmist climate claims to even cursory analysis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Yet , because social media does investigate and fact-check , pushing against a group-think narrative and exposing the lies and real misinformation surrounding the climate scare , climate alarmists have to fight back using dirty tricks like labeling social media authors as if they were radical enemies of the state , worthy of imprisonment in the gulag .
This isn ’ t the first time such wild calls for the criminalization of contrary climate opinion have been made , in fact , it goes back to 2014 : Lawrence Torcello , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Technology , NY , writes in an essay at The Conversation that climate scientists who fail to communicate the correct message about “ global warming ” should face trial for “ criminal negligence.
” A commenter on his article went even further to suggest that I should be sent to the war crimes tribunal in the Hauge for having a different opinion on climate : “ … I believe Anthony Watts should be frogmarched to The Hague as well .
No question , in my mind .
In fact , I find the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ethically reprehensible.
” It gets worse .
An ugly theatrical play , called Kill Climate Deniers , was even created in Australian about the issue .
The bottom line ?
Imprisonment of political dissidents has been a common theme with repressive regimes going back to the beginning of history .
When those seeking power can ’ t convince the populace of the merits of their ideas , they start putting people who disagree in jail , hoping that fear will keep the rest in line .
Fortunately , we live in a country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Constitution .
But , should the time ever come when I ’ m going to be imprisoned for my viewpoints , I won ’ t go quietly , and neither will the thousands of independent thinkers on social media .

Written by Anthony Watts on Jul 7, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
Unable to win the debate in the court of public opinion, climate activists are increasingly calling for the imprisonment of climate realists.
The latest example is an article in Carbon Brief titled “How climate change misinformation spreads online.”
The authors, who are all University of Exeter professors, advocate fines and imprisonment for people publishing “climate misinformation” online.
They justify their call for imprisonment by claiming tremendous harm from “misleading information that is created and spread with intent to deceive.”
That’s one take, another take is that those who publish what the Left deems as “misinformation” are actually publishing what might be dubbed “inconvenient truths.”
The 2006 film by Al Gore of the same name is a case in point. Gore, not being particularly good at details, published a boatload of misinformation in that film, and social media responded to correct the record.
In one scene, Gore used an animated clip of a polar bear in danger of drowning, trying to get onto a tiny ice flow made smaller, presumably by global warming. Gore cited this as the new normal of drowning polar bears.
The reality? Scientists documented one drowned polar bear at sea after an intense storm, something that hasn’t been seen since.
According to an Associated Press article:
“A federal wildlife biologist whose observation in 2004 of presumably drowned polar bears in the Arctic helped to galvanize the global warming movement has been placed on administrative leave and is being investigated for scientific misconduct, possibly over the veracity of that article.”
Social media was the first to point out problems with Gore’s polar bear claims, and they were proven right.
Then there’s the claim Gore made about Mt. Kilimanjaro losing its ice cap due to “global warming.”
Again, social media was the first to point out that what was really happening was a consequence of deforestation around the base of the mountain making less water vapor available by the process of trees releasing water into the atmosphere.
Without as much water vapor causing replenishing snows, the ice simply dried up like old ice cubes in a freezer.
And finally, Gore made the bold claim in 2009 that the Arctic ice cap might be gone in five years. Again, social media was the first to point out the problems with this claim.
To this day, the Arctic ice cap remains, and Gore no longer references any of those claims he once made.
If it weren’t for social media, we’d still be hearing about these. The media choose not to subject alarmist climate claims to even cursory analysis, and investigative reporting is virtually non-existent.
Yet, because social media does investigate and fact-check, pushing against a group-think narrative and exposing the lies and real misinformation surrounding the climate scare, climate alarmists have to fight back using dirty tricks like labeling social media authors as if they were radical enemies of the state, worthy of imprisonment in the gulag.
This isn’t the first time such wild calls for the criminalization of contrary climate opinion have been made, in fact, it goes back to 2014:
Lawrence Torcello, a liberal arts professor at Rochester Institute of Technology, NY, writes in an essay at The Conversation that climate scientists who fail to communicate the correct message about “global warming” should face trial for “criminal negligence.”
A commenter on his article went even further to suggest that I should be sent to the war crimes tribunal in the Hauge for having a different opinion on climate:
“… I believe Anthony Watts should be frogmarched to The Hague as well. No question, in my mind. In fact, I find the idea of a defense of his actions ethically reprehensible.”
It gets worse. An ugly theatrical play, called Kill Climate Deniers, was even created in Australian about the issue.
The bottom line? Imprisonment of political dissidents has been a common theme with repressive regimes going back to the beginning of history.
When those seeking power can’t convince the populace of the merits of their ideas, they start putting people who disagree in jail, hoping that fear will keep the rest in line.
Fortunately, we live in a country where free speech is guaranteed by the Constitution.
But, should the time ever come when I’m going to be imprisoned for my viewpoints, I won’t go quietly, and neither will the thousands of independent thinkers on social media.
Read more at Climate Realism
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-07-07--2020’s Been A Rough Year For Greta Thunberg

Written by 21Wire Editorial Team on .
Posted in Latest news The tea leaves are beginning to turn out .
This may well be the year in which the climate change movement begins to go off the rails .
It started off great , as elites and climatistas descended on Davos to press home what looked to be the final mile in ramming through the adoption of some form of global Green New Deal by year ’ s end .
Their secret weapon : a Swedish teen who was primed , locked , and loaded .
Their cause was then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Climate campaigners were over the moon with excitement over the lockdown and boasted with claims of lower CO2 levels due to the economic shutdown .
In just two months , COVID lockdown policies had achieved what climate campaigners had been working for years to realize .
Or so they thought .
It was later revealed that lockdowns had little or no impact on overall CO2 concentration .
But since when did a little science get in the way of an apocalyptic juggernaut .
But something strange happened on the way to Wuhan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the intergovernmental fear campaign to promote COVID lockdowns – was dubious computer modeling .
Initially , these were referred to as “ The Science ” by cock-sure politicians and public health officials .
The press quickly fell in line with this groupthink .
Any dissenters were roundly attacked and de-platformed .
As their mission crept on , it became clear that these models were ever only masquerading as ‘ science ’ .
The fictional doomsday scenarios being created by technocrats were then snapped up by the mainstream media and then used them to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ centralized policy of de-industrialization and mass travel bans .
Perhaps it ’ s no coincidence that this is exactly what climatistas and Green New Deal campaigners have been hoping for .
Prior to COVID , few dared to publicly challenge the intellectual primacy of computer modeling , especially in the field of climate science .
Skeptics were simply told , “ Shut up !
They are experts !
” Only , it turns out the skeptics were right .
It was regarded as infallible , even though just like Neil Ferguson and Imperial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – these glorified SIM City simulations were not scientific at all .
The fall-out in both the UK and US over these wild computer-generated predictions that were used by governments to adopt lockdown policies has also exposed these crude devices as pseudo-science used to paint an unlikely Armageddon .
Now , a scorned public is starting to question the assumed authority of computer modeling .
People are beginning to look more cautiously at climate modelers from the IPCC , and serial data masseuses like Michael Mann – all of whom are being questioned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this will continue to erode away at the foundations of once-sacred climate dogma which has enjoyed its place on the throne of consensus reality ever since Al Gore released his now-discredited documentary film An Inconvenient Truth in 2005 .
Adding more insult to injury , this year also saw the release of Michael Moore ’ s documentary Planet of Humans which completely destroyed the received green wisdom regarding stalwart solutions for ‘ green ’ energy being touted by environmental activists over the last 30 years .
For their blasphemy , both Moore and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the progressive left and irate green campaigners for breaking rank on the green new gospel .
This incident was then followed by the release of the new book , Apocalypse Never : Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All , by green policy expert Michael Shellenberg .
The book quickly shot up to number # 3 top seller on Amazon and has since drawn fire from activists who claim that like Moore , the author has stabbed the climate movement in the back by revealing some of the trade secrets of green activism .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ obvious – that humans are not causing a “ sixth mass extinction , ” that climate change is not making natural disasters worse , and that CO2 emissions are actually plateaued in most developed nations .
For this , he has been mercilessly attacked by climate clerics .
And that brings us back to Generation X , Y , Z ’ s ( and liberal Boomers too ) latter-day Joan of Arch , the mercurial Swede , Greta Thunberg .
Before coronavirus , her stock was riding high – halfway into a glorious @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , leading to an appearance at COP25 Climate Summit in Spain , and then on to the World Economic Forum in Davos , Switzerland , where she rubbed elbows with Charles , the Prince of Wales .
At Davos , it was clear that Greta ’ s physical appearance had changed .
She had lost a lot of weight in a very short space of time – a far cry from her jovial , bouncy self .
This was a new mini-adult , a darker and much more cynical Greta .
Clearly , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the green glitterati life were wearing on her .
And her disdain for the great and the good was manifest .
From there , she would have been looking forward to a spring season was meant to culminate in a series of youth ‘ climate actions ’ spanning into summer , maybe an appearance at Glastonbury festival next to some supergroup , and then leading towards COP26 in Glasgow this November .
That was the plan .
But unfortunately , with the west ’ s student body all but grounded at home by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Greta could not expect to rally any of her legions of angry adolescents .
Now donning masks and plastic visors , the angry youth have other more pressing issues to contend with now ; fears of the plague , school closures , oppressive social distancing regimes , and mass unemployment – all of which will trump fears that sea levels might rise a few meters in 200 years time .
Even COP26 might end up being done on Zoom due to COVID concerns .
Greta ’ s gravitas doesn ’ t translate as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ painful as that might sound to any hardcore climatistas reading this , we ’ re sorry , that ’ s just where things are at now .
But Greta is a very sharp customer , and will eventually cop on to the game .
Greta has begun to hit out at world leaders – who she claims has been using her to “ look good.
” Certainly , turnabout is fair play , but we should point out that Greta was a minor through her mercurial rise to fame , therefore , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Svante Thunberg and mother and opera singer Malena Ernman – who have allowed their daughter to be used as a glorified mascot for political parties , multiple globalist organizations , NGOs , and corporate media consortiums .
In a recent interview on Swedish radio during the COVID crisis , she accused German chancellor , Angela Merkel , of using her for cheap “ selfie ” at a UN event in New York .
“ Presidents , prime ministers , kings , and princesses came and wanted to talk to me , ” said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suddenly saw the chance that they could take a photo with me for their Instagram account .
Then the hashtag # savetheplanet … They can post it on social media and it makes them look good , it makes them seem like they care.
” Her handlers should take heed : she ’ s getting savvier .
For those who have actually followed her story , you will know that from day one , Greta Thunberg ’ s supposed ‘ grassroots ’ rise was a well-financed and carefully choreographed public relations campaign , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ security and a gaggle of support staff .
As time progresses , and as the holes in the climate narrative start to expand , it ’ s increasingly likely that Greta herself , now 17 years old , will realize the extent of the operation in which she ’ s been used as a tool to wind-up and set in motion .
At that point , she will be a full-fledged adult , and thus harder to manage by her handlers working to ferry around this Green New Deal mascot .
Sooner or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her childhood .
By that time , the wheels may have already fallen off the climate change bandwagon .
The information berm has now burst .
With each passing month , you will see more green realists going off-script .
More Moore ’ s and more Shellenberger ’ s .
But that doesn ’ t mean it will stop .
If COVID showed us anything , it ’ s globalists organizations and their cadres in government are determined to advance their Great Reset agenda in preparation for their Fourth Industrial Revolution and UBI @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Brave New World .
That ’ s no exaggeration .
US Presidential Election beckons , and there ’ s more at stake than ever .
Many believe a Trump victory could set the climate change agenda back a further ten years .
So in terms of expediting this agenda , 2020 is really a do-or-die year .

Written by 21Wire Editorial Team on Jul 7, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
The tea leaves are beginning to turn out. This may well be the year in which the climate change movement begins to go off the rails.
It started off great, as elites and climatistas descended on Davos to press home what looked to be the final mile in ramming through the adoption of some form of global Green New Deal by year’s end.
Their secret weapon: a Swedish teen who was primed, locked, and loaded.
Their cause was then handed another gift in the Coronavirus lockdowns. Climate campaigners were over the moon with excitement over the lockdown and boasted with claims of lower CO2 levels due to the economic shutdown.
In just two months, COVID lockdown policies had achieved what climate campaigners had been working for years to realize.
Or so they thought. It was later revealed that lockdowns had little or no impact on overall CO2 concentration. But since when did a little science get in the way of an apocalyptic juggernaut.
But something strange happened on the way to Wuhan.
One of the key components of the intergovernmental fear campaign to promote COVID lockdowns – was dubious computer modeling.
Initially, these were referred to as “The Science” by cock-sure politicians and public health officials. The press quickly fell in line with this groupthink. Any dissenters were roundly attacked and de-platformed.
As their mission crept on, it became clear that these models were ever only masquerading as ‘science’.
The fictional doomsday scenarios being created by technocrats were then snapped up by the mainstream media and then used them to hound political officials into implementing a one-size-fits-all centralized policy of de-industrialization and mass travel bans.
Perhaps it’s no coincidence that this is exactly what climatistas and Green New Deal campaigners have been hoping for.
Prior to COVID, few dared to publicly challenge the intellectual primacy of computer modeling, especially in the field of climate science.
Skeptics were simply told, “Shut up! They are experts!” Only, it turns out the skeptics were right.
It was regarded as infallible, even though just like Neil Ferguson and Imperial College’s erroneous modeling of pandemics – these glorified SIM City simulations were not scientific at all.
The fall-out in both the UK and US over these wild computer-generated predictions that were used by governments to adopt lockdown policies has also exposed these crude devices as pseudo-science used to paint an unlikely Armageddon.
Now, a scorned public is starting to question the assumed authority of computer modeling. People are beginning to look more cautiously at climate modelers from the IPCC, and serial data masseuses like Michael Mann – all of whom are being questioned with renewed skepticism.
No doubt, this will continue to erode away at the foundations of once-sacred climate dogma which has enjoyed its place on the throne of consensus reality ever since Al Gore released his now-discredited documentary film An Inconvenient Truth in 2005.
Adding more insult to injury, this year also saw the release of Michael Moore’s documentary Planet of Humans which completely destroyed the received green wisdom regarding stalwart solutions for ‘green’ energy being touted by environmental activists over the last 30 years.
For their blasphemy, both Moore and director Jeff Gibbs were branded heretics by the progressive left and irate green campaigners for breaking rank on the green new gospel.
This incident was then followed by the release of the new book, Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All, by green policy expert Michael Shellenberg.
The book quickly shot up to number #3 top seller on Amazon and has since drawn fire from activists who claim that like Moore, the author has stabbed the climate movement in the back by revealing some of the trade secrets of green activism.
But Shellenberger is merely pointed out the obvious – that humans are not causing a “sixth mass extinction,” that climate change is not making natural disasters worse, and that CO2 emissions are actually plateaued in most developed nations.
For this, he has been mercilessly attacked by climate clerics.
And that brings us back to Generation X, Y, Z’s (and liberal Boomers too) latter-day Joan of Arch, the mercurial Swede, Greta Thunberg.
Before coronavirus, her stock was riding high – halfway into a glorious gap year and transatlantic carbon-neutral sailing excursion, leading to an appearance at COP25 Climate Summit in Spain, and then on to the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, where she rubbed elbows with Charles, the Prince of Wales.
At Davos, it was clear that Greta’s physical appearance had changed. She had lost a lot of weight in a very short space of time – a far cry from her jovial, bouncy self.
This was a new mini-adult, a darker and much more cynical Greta. Clearly, the miles, the media, and the green glitterati life were wearing on her. And her disdain for the great and the good was manifest.
Watch:
From there, she would have been looking forward to a spring season was meant to culminate in a series of youth ‘climate actions’ spanning into summer, maybe an appearance at Glastonbury festival next to some supergroup, and then leading towards COP26 in Glasgow this November.
That was the plan. But unfortunately, with the west’s student body all but grounded at home by a new more impressive Project Fear, Greta could not expect to rally any of her legions of angry adolescents.
Now donning masks and plastic visors, the angry youth have other more pressing issues to contend with now; fears of the plague, school closures, oppressive social distancing regimes, and mass unemployment – all of which will trump fears that sea levels might rise a few meters in 200 years time.
Even COP26 might end up being done on Zoom due to COVID concerns. Greta’s gravitas doesn’t translate as well in desktop avatar form.
As painful as that might sound to any hardcore climatistas reading this, we’re sorry, that’s just where things are at now.
But Greta is a very sharp customer, and will eventually cop on to the game. Greta has begun to hit out at world leaders – who she claims has been using her to “look good.”
Certainly, turnabout is fair play, but we should point out that Greta was a minor through her mercurial rise to fame, therefore, it is her parents, father and actor Svante Thunberg and mother and opera singer Malena Ernman – who have allowed their daughter to be used as a glorified mascot for political parties, multiple globalist organizations, NGOs, and corporate media consortiums.
In a recent interview on Swedish radio during the COVID crisis, she accused German chancellor, Angela Merkel, of using her for cheap “selfie” at a UN event in New York.
“Presidents, prime ministers, kings, and princesses came and wanted to talk to me,” said Greta.
“They saw me and suddenly saw the chance that they could take a photo with me for their Instagram account. Then the hashtag #savetheplanet … They can post it on social media and it makes them look good, it makes them seem like they care.”
Her handlers should take heed: she’s getting savvier.
For those who have actually followed her story, you will know that from day one, Greta Thunberg’s supposed ‘grassroots’ rise was a well-financed and carefully choreographed public relations campaign, complete with road managers, scriptwriters, security and a gaggle of support staff.
As time progresses, and as the holes in the climate narrative start to expand, it’s increasingly likely that Greta herself, now 17 years old, will realize the extent of the operation in which she’s been used as a tool to wind-up and set in motion.
At that point, she will be a full-fledged adult, and thus harder to manage by her handlers working to ferry around this Green New Deal mascot. Sooner or later, she may want to reclaim her childhood.
By that time, the wheels may have already fallen off the climate change bandwagon. The information berm has now burst. With each passing month, you will see more green realists going off-script. More Moore’s and more Shellenberger’s.
But that doesn’t mean it will stop. If COVID showed us anything, it’s globalists organizations and their cadres in government are determined to advance their Great Reset agenda in preparation for their Fourth Industrial Revolution and UBI utopia.
Shades of Huxley’s Brave New World. That’s no exaggeration.
US Presidential Election beckons, and there’s more at stake than ever. Many believe a Trump victory could set the climate change agenda back a further ten years.
So in terms of expediting this agenda, 2020 is really a do-or-die year.
Read more at 21st Century Wire
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-07-07--A Tragic Triple Whammy Of Energy Setbacks

Written by Craig Rucker on .
Posted in Latest news A federal district court shut down the Dakota Access Pipeline and ordered it drained of oil .
The Supreme Court excluded the Keystone XL Pipeline from an otherwise positive decision that the number of pipeline projects gets “ fast-tracked.
” Dominion Energy won a major court victory for its Atlantic Pipeline , then decided to scrap it anyway , deciding the delays and costs imposed by left-wing obstruction were just too much .
Dominion ’ s stock promptly plunged 11.3 % .
In recent years we have been favored by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ energy independence and security achieved at last .
It is a tragedy of astounding proportions that tremendously well-financed efforts are continually underway nationwide to obstruct , delay , and in effect ruin America ’ s energy infrastructure .
Energy Secretary Dan Brouillette issued a hard-hitting a statement about the Dakota Access decision that could apply to all three : “ It is disappointing that , once again , an energy infrastructure project that provides thousands of jobs and millions of dollars in economic revenue has been shut down by the well-funded environmental lobby @ @ @ @ @ @ @ system to further their agenda .
The Dakota Access Pipeline safely provides affordable and reliable American-produced crude oil across the Midwest and has created approximately 10,000 jobs .
In addition , the shutdown will eliminate millions of tax dollars paid by the pipeline each year that go towards schools , hospitals , and other community services in North Dakota , South Dakota , Iowa , and Illinois.
” The far Left , of course , is jubilant .
“ Three dangerous pipelines delayed within 24 hours should serve as a clear warning to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dirty fossil fuel projects .
For more than a decade now , a powerful movement has been taking on reckless oil and gas pipelines and fighting to put Indigenous rights , a just economy , and our environment before oil company profits… It is past time to leave fossil fuels in the ground and begin a just transition to a Green New Deal and 100 percent renewable energy.
” There is a new nihilism that stalks our land .
Statues of civil rights leaders are being torn down , supposedly in the name @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to defund the police in communities most desperate for law and order .
Clean , safe , efficient energy is blocked without regard to the hard fact that there is nothing available to replace it .
Activists trumpet inefficient , intermittent wind and solar , ignorant to the fact that they are unable to meet our energy needs .
Wind and solar don ’ t replace pipelines .
Trucks , trains , and tankers do — albeit poorly .
Americans need to dig deep , fight back , and defeat the Greens — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the dark .

Written by Craig Rucker on Jul 7, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
America’s energy supply just received three devastating blows.
A federal district court shut down the Dakota Access Pipeline and ordered it drained of oil.
The Supreme Court excluded the Keystone XL Pipeline from an otherwise positive decision that the number of pipeline projects gets “fast-tracked.”
Dominion Energy won a major court victory for its Atlantic Pipeline, then decided to scrap it anyway, deciding the delays and costs imposed by left-wing obstruction were just too much. Dominion’s stock promptly plunged 11.3%.
In recent years we have been favored by a long-awaited energy renaissance, with American energy independence and security achieved at last.
It is a tragedy of astounding proportions that tremendously well-financed efforts are continually underway nationwide to obstruct, delay, and in effect ruin America’s energy infrastructure.
Energy Secretary Dan Brouillette issued a hard-hitting a statement about the Dakota Access decision that could apply to all three:
“It is disappointing that, once again, an energy infrastructure project that provides thousands of jobs and millions of dollars in economic revenue has been shut down by the well-funded environmental lobby, using our Nation’s court system to further their agenda. The Dakota Access Pipeline safely provides affordable and reliable American-produced crude oil across the Midwest and has created approximately 10,000 jobs. In addition, the shutdown will eliminate millions of tax dollars paid by the pipeline each year that go towards schools, hospitals, and other community services in North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, and Illinois.”
The far Left, of course, is jubilant.
Greenpeace climate director Janet Redmans said:
“Three dangerous pipelines delayed within 24 hours should serve as a clear warning to any companies hoping to double down on dirty fossil fuel projects. For more than a decade now, a powerful movement has been taking on reckless oil and gas pipelines and fighting to put Indigenous rights, a just economy, and our environment before oil company profits… It is past time to leave fossil fuels in the ground and begin a just transition to a Green New Deal and 100 percent renewable energy.”
Charming.
There is a new nihilism that stalks our land. Statues of civil rights leaders are being torn down, supposedly in the name of civil rights. Cries ring out to defund the police in communities most desperate for law and order.
Clean, safe, efficient energy is blocked without regard to the hard fact that there is nothing available to replace it.
Activists trumpet inefficient, intermittent wind and solar, ignorant to the fact that they are unable to meet our energy needs.
Wind and solar don’t replace pipelines. Trucks, trains, and tankers do — albeit poorly.
Americans need to dig deep, fight back, and defeat the Greens — before they leave us all freezing in the dark.
Read more at CFACT
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-07-07--Saluting Fred Singer And Dennis Avery, Serious Scientific Critics

Written by Richard W. Rahn on .
Posted in Latest news There are a lucky few who take on the conventional wisdom of the time and then live long enough to see their skeptics and critics admit they were wrong .
Most of the American Founders were so fortunate .
F. A. Hayek , the great 20th-century economist/philosopher , was another lucky one .
Hayek spent his life arguing for civil society while being perhaps the most learned critic of socialism/communism .
When his best-selling and most famous book , “ The Road to Serfdom , ” was published in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ establishment for arguing that socialism ultimately leads to oppression , stagnation , and finally collapse , because of its internal contradictions .
By the 1970s , many began to realize that Hayek indeed had been right , and he was awarded a Nobel Prize .
By the time he died in 1992 , he had been totally vindicated , with the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the return to market-based economies in Eastern Europe and elsewhere .
The modern-day environmental movement has many parallels with the rise and fall of socialism/communism in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ concerned about the growing air and water pollution , and demanded change — now , the air and water are cleaner than they were before colonial times — when everyone had a wood-burning , smoky fireplace , and streams and rivers were used as sewers .
The constructive need for action to clean up the environment morphed into a movement that made more and more radical demands ( many of which made no scientific or economic sense ) , coupled with outlandish predictions .
It has now been about four decades since the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the coming Ice Age to the perils of global warming .
I remember the graphic projections of Manhattan , covered by two-miles of ice , shown on TV science programs with Carl Sagan .
We were told ( by Al Gore and some of his scientist buddies , many of whom depended on federal funding and others ) that by this time the polar ice cap would be long gone and polar bears would be extinct , along with numerous other calamities that have not occurred .
Cruise and cargo ships still can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seems there is an ice problem ) while polar bears appear to be at record population levels and are presenting danger in some Canadian towns .
From the beginning of the extreme environmental movement , there were a number of serious scientific critics , including Fred Singer and Dennis Avery .
Singer passed away in April at age 95 , and Avery passed away two weeks ago at age 83 .
I was privileged to know both of them , and Dennis was a friend for decades .
Michael Shellenberger , a leading @ @ @ @ @ @ @ years , has just published a new and important book , “ Apocalypse Never : Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All.
” He gives a formal apology in his book for misleading the public , and in essence , he now admits that Singer , Avery , and the other serious and knowledgeable critics of the environmental movement were right .
To his credit , Mr. Shellenberger decided he needed to separate fact from fiction to reduce “ anxiety ” among adolescents , including his own teenage daughter .
To quote from his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ emissions have peaked and have been declining in most developed nations for over a decade .
Deaths from extreme weather , even in poor nations , declined 80 percent over the last four decades .
And the risk of the earth warming to very high temperatures is increasingly unlikely , thanks to slowing population growth and abundant natural gas.
” Fred Singer was an extremely effective critic of the environmental zealots .
They could not portray him as a know-nothing .
He had a Ph.D. in atmospheric physics from Princeton .
He was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scientific purposes and became the first director of satellite meteorological services , now part of NOAA .
Later , he served as a director of water quality and research at what became the EPA .
He subsequently spent many years at the University of Virginia as a professor of Environmental Sciences .
He was a frequent and , as it turned out , a correct critic of many of the climate models that were used as a basis for the IPCC and other governmental agency policy recommendations .
Singer was the author of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ books , including “ Unstoppable Global Warming : Every 1500 Years ” ( 2007 ) with Dennis Avery .
Climate Change Weekly just published a tribute under the very apt title : “ Dennis Avery : A life well-lived in pursuit of the betterment of humankind.
” Dennis grew up on a Michigan farm and trained as an agricultural economist .
He became the go-to expert on world food production , with a deep understanding of both science and market incentives .
He often explained how only destructive government policies , such as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could keep food production from growing faster than population , because of scientific advances ( Thomas Malthus was wrong ) .
He also became an expert on climate cycles and their impact on human history .
In his various stints in government and with think tanks , he wrote important reports , where his recommendations on both agricultural and environmental policy had constructive impacts .
He was a gentleman farmer , a very fine scholar , and a great guy .

Written by Richard W. Rahn on Jul 7, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
There are a lucky few who take on the conventional wisdom of the time and then live long enough to see their skeptics and critics admit they were wrong. Most of the American Founders were so fortunate.
F. A. Hayek, the great 20th-century economist/philosopher, was another lucky one. Hayek spent his life arguing for civil society while being perhaps the most learned critic of socialism/communism.
When his best-selling and most famous book, “The Road to Serfdom,” was published in 1944, he was ridiculed by the establishment for arguing that socialism ultimately leads to oppression, stagnation, and finally collapse, because of its internal contradictions.
By the 1970s, many began to realize that Hayek indeed had been right, and he was awarded a Nobel Prize. By the time he died in 1992, he had been totally vindicated, with the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the return to market-based economies in Eastern Europe and elsewhere.
The modern-day environmental movement has many parallels with the rise and fall of socialism/communism in the 20th century.
Serious people were concerned about the growing air and water pollution, and demanded change — now, the air and water are cleaner than they were before colonial times — when everyone had a wood-burning, smoky fireplace, and streams and rivers were used as sewers.
The constructive need for action to clean up the environment morphed into a movement that made more and more radical demands (many of which made no scientific or economic sense), coupled with outlandish predictions.
It has now been about four decades since the fringe environmentalists switched from warning us about the coming Ice Age to the perils of global warming.
I remember the graphic projections of Manhattan, covered by two-miles of ice, shown on TV science programs with Carl Sagan.
We were told (by Al Gore and some of his scientist buddies, many of whom depended on federal funding and others) that by this time the polar ice cap would be long gone and polar bears would be extinct, along with numerous other calamities that have not occurred.
Cruise and cargo ships still cannot sail over the Arctic Ocean (seems there is an ice problem) while polar bears appear to be at record population levels and are presenting danger in some Canadian towns.
From the beginning of the extreme environmental movement, there were a number of serious scientific critics, including Fred Singer and Dennis Avery.
Singer passed away in April at age 95, and Avery passed away two weeks ago at age 83. I was privileged to know both of them, and Dennis was a friend for decades.
Michael Shellenberger, a leading energy expert and environmental scientist/activist for many years, has just published a new and important book, “Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All.”
He gives a formal apology in his book for misleading the public, and in essence, he now admits that Singer, Avery, and the other serious and knowledgeable critics of the environmental movement were right.
To his credit, Mr. Shellenberger decided he needed to separate fact from fiction to reduce “anxiety” among adolescents, including his own teenage daughter.
To quote from his own Amazon book blurb, “Carbon emissions have peaked and have been declining in most developed nations for over a decade. Deaths from extreme weather, even in poor nations, declined 80 percent over the last four decades. And the risk of the earth warming to very high temperatures is increasingly unlikely, thanks to slowing population growth and abundant natural gas.”
Fred Singer was an extremely effective critic of the environmental zealots. They could not portray him as a know-nothing. He had a Ph.D. in atmospheric physics from Princeton.
He was an early advocate of using satellites for scientific purposes and became the first director of satellite meteorological services, now part of NOAA. Later, he served as a director of water quality and research at what became the EPA.
He subsequently spent many years at the University of Virginia as a professor of Environmental Sciences.
He was a frequent and, as it turned out, a correct critic of many of the climate models that were used as a basis for the IPCC and other governmental agency policy recommendations.
Singer was the author of many articles, scientific papers, and books, including “Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1500 Years” (2007) with Dennis Avery.
Climate Change Weekly just published a tribute under the very apt title: “Dennis Avery: A life well-lived in pursuit of the betterment of humankind.”
Dennis grew up on a Michigan farm and trained as an agricultural economist. He became the go-to expert on world food production, with a deep understanding of both science and market incentives.
He often explained how only destructive government policies, such as those in the old Soviet Union, could keep food production from growing faster than population, because of scientific advances (Thomas Malthus was wrong).
He also became an expert on climate cycles and their impact on human history. In his various stints in government and with think tanks, he wrote important reports, where his recommendations on both agricultural and environmental policy had constructive impacts.
He was a gentleman farmer, a very fine scholar, and a great guy.
Read more at Washington Examiner
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-07-07--Rational Energy Policy Means Embracing Clean Coal Technology

Written by Dan Ervin on .
Posted in Latest news When environmentalists talk about carbon mitigation , they invariably leave out coal technology .
That ’ s absurd .
The reality is that , despite coal plant shutdowns in the United States and Europe , coal is prospering in Asia and beyond , and this requires a new way of thinking and talking about the transition to clean energy sources and how to facilitate the use of coal in an environmentally sound way — recognizing the considerable benefits this will bring in an era of economic uncertainty .
Those who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think again .
Though many coal plants have closed in recent years due to competition from cheap natural gas and subsidized solar and wind energy , coal still accounts for about 20 % of US-generating capacity and much more in states where manufacturers demand a reliable supply of baseload electricity : Indiana ( 56.7 % ) , Missouri ( 72.8 % ) , Kentucky ( 72.7 % ) .
Globally , coal is an energy mainstay .
It supplies 40 % of the world ’ s electricity and 60 % in both China @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are being added in a number of Asian countries to grow their economies .
Among the countries adding more coal-fired capacity are Indonesia , Vietnam , Bangladesh , and Japan .
Japan plans to build as many as 22 new coal plants in the next five years .
According to the World Coal Association , a total of 600 coal plants are currently under construction around the world .
Besides , Asia ’ s coal fleet is young , with hundreds of plants just a decade old .
They will be operating for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brings home the new reality is the fact that China has 250 gigawatts of coal-generating capacity under development – an amount larger than the entire existing coal fleets in the United States and India , according to the Global Energy Monitor .
This adds up to a very different outlook from a few years ago .
Until fairly recently , the emphasis in China appeared to be on nuclear power , renewables , and importing liquefied natural gas .
But now pressure to stimulate the economy has Beijing turning back to the energy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s renewed commitment to coal and coal ’ s dominance in Asia must inform our own energy policy .
Whether or not Green New Dealers like it , coal is here to stay and U.S. leadership in developing and demonstrating advanced coal technologies is more urgent than ever .
The U.S. must crank up its rate of innovation .
A good start is the Department of Energy ’ s Coal FIRST program , with its commitment to developing modular coal plants that produce electricity with nearly no carbon emissions .
Further demonstration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ storage technologies must also be part of the equation .
Rational climate policy embraces energy reality and considers the fuels the world uses and will continue to use .
Fossil fuels meet the lion ’ s share of the world ’ s energy needs – roughly 80 % — and will remain irreplaceable for the foreseeable future .
U.S. energy and climate leadership will make clean energy technologies of all kinds affordable and globally ubiquitous .
Domestic energy and climate policy that turns its back on coal and coal technologies turns its back @ @ @ @ @

Written by Dan Ervin on Jul 7, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
When environmentalists talk about carbon mitigation, they invariably leave out coal technology. That’s absurd.
The reality is that, despite coal plant shutdowns in the United States and Europe, coal is prospering in Asia and beyond, and this requires a new way of thinking and talking about the transition to clean energy sources and how to facilitate the use of coal in an environmentally sound way — recognizing the considerable benefits this will bring in an era of economic uncertainty.
Those who think that coal no longer matters should think again.
Though many coal plants have closed in recent years due to competition from cheap natural gas and subsidized solar and wind energy, coal still accounts for about 20% of US-generating capacity and much more in states where manufacturers demand a reliable supply of baseload electricity: Indiana (56.7%), Missouri (72.8%), Kentucky (72.7%).
Globally, coal is an energy mainstay. It supplies 40% of the world’s electricity and 60% in both China and India — and new coal plants are being added in a number of Asian countries to grow their economies.
Among the countries adding more coal-fired capacity are Indonesia, Vietnam, Bangladesh, and Japan. Japan plans to build as many as 22 new coal plants in the next five years.
According to the World Coal Association, a total of 600 coal plants are currently under construction around the world.
Besides, Asia’s coal fleet is young, with hundreds of plants just a decade old. They will be operating for decades to come.
But what really brings home the new reality is the fact that China has 250 gigawatts of coal-generating capacity under development – an amount larger than the entire existing coal fleets in the United States and India, according to the Global Energy Monitor.
This adds up to a very different outlook from a few years ago.
Until fairly recently, the emphasis in China appeared to be on nuclear power, renewables, and importing liquefied natural gas. But now pressure to stimulate the economy has Beijing turning back to the energy security and affordability of coal.
China’s renewed commitment to coal and coal’s dominance in Asia must inform our own energy policy.
Whether or not Green New Dealers like it, coal is here to stay and U.S. leadership in developing and demonstrating advanced coal technologies is more urgent than ever.
The U.S. must crank up its rate of innovation. A good start is the Department of Energy’s Coal FIRST program, with its commitment to developing modular coal plants that produce electricity with nearly no carbon emissions.
Further demonstration of carbon capture, utilization, and storage technologies must also be part of the equation.
Rational climate policy embraces energy reality and considers the fuels the world uses and will continue to use.
Fossil fuels meet the lion’s share of the world’s energy needs – roughly 80% — and will remain irreplaceable for the foreseeable future.
U.S. energy and climate leadership will make clean energy technologies of all kinds affordable and globally ubiquitous.
Domestic energy and climate policy that turns its back on coal and coal technologies turns its back on meaningful global solutions.
Read more at RealClearEnergy
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-07-07--Cold Comfort For Green Energy As Queensland Shivers

Written by Viv Forbes , guest post on .
Posted in Latest news Before sunrise yesterday , the grass temperature @ @ @ @ @ Queensland ” was minus 1.7 deg C. There was no wind or sunshine .
Wind @ @ @ @ @ even moonbeams energized our solar panels .
In that still , frosty darkness , green @ @ @ @ @ a watt came from becalmed wind “ farms ” or from subsidized solar panels cluttering @ @ @ @ @ ) .
But we didn ’ t need our diesel in the shed – we @ @ @ @ @ King Coal , with maybe a dash of gas or hydro .
Reliable 24/7 generators @ @ @ @ @ , heaters , and coffee before we checked the frosty flats for new-born lambs .
@ @ @ @ @ and the UN-ABC-BBC relentlessly push unreliable “ green ” energy , promising it will promote @ @ @ @ @ be careful what they wish for .
Neither sheep nor shepherds like frosty darkness .

Written by Viv Forbes, guest post on Jul 7, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
Before sunrise yesterday, the grass temperature in Washpool, “Sunny Queensland” was minus 1.7 deg C.
There was no wind or sunshine. Wind turbines were becalmed and not even moonbeams energized our solar panels.
In that still, frosty darkness, green energy failed again.
Not a watt came from becalmed wind “farms” or from subsidized solar panels cluttering many roofs (including ours).
But we didn’t need our diesel in the shed – we were saved by trusty Old King Coal, with maybe a dash of gas or hydro.
Reliable 24/7 generators provided pre-dawn power-by-wire for lights, heaters, and coffee before we checked the frosty flats for new-born lambs.
Yet politicians, academics, and the UN-ABC-BBC relentlessly push unreliable “green” energy, promising it will promote global cooling.
They should be careful what they wish for. Neither sheep nor shepherds like frosty darkness.
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-07-07--Activists Target ‘Science’ As Racist, Want To #ShutDownSTEM

Written by Michael O ’ Dowd on .
Posted in Latest news One could argue that the true genesis of mankind was marked not by the emergence of hominids with less body hair or the expansion of the brain , but with the very first question about the world and how it works .
Every civilization has attempted to provide answers , and these answers came in the form of religious doctrine .
Whether it be Prometheus molding the first men from mud or Adam and Eve , humanity has scrambled to find an explanation for the questions that nature @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nature failed to satisfy mankind , another approach was developed .
This approach is now known as the scientific method .
Within this method , ideas and postulation are given no credence , the scientific method deals only in evidence .
Finally , humanity uncovered some of the answers it desperately sought .
Science has provided us with tools that are simply beyond the comprehension of someone from 300 years ago .
Science is arguably the greatest thing humanity has created and is most likely the force that will shape our future .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ has materialized on my newsfeed ?
What does this mean ?
The killing of George Floyd has ignited a massive political upheaval , with slogans such as Black Lives Matter and ‘ Defund the police ’ taking center stage .
The topic of race has infiltrated everyday conversation as well as political dialogue .
The concept of systemic/institutional racism is regularly articulated and often accepted as canon .
The scientific community hasn ’ t escaped judgment .
On June 10 , academic work was halted for a day in a campaign called # @ @ @ @ @ @ @ technology , engineering , and mathematics ) .
The organizers presented it as an opportunity for scientists and researchers ‘ to reflect on their own complicity in anti-Black racism in academia and their local and global communities.
’ The evidence put forth to demonstrate the ‘ systemic racism ’ within science is quite simple : that black people are underrepresented in the sciences .
This is a classic example of the reduction fallacy , also known as the fallacy of the single cause .
This is characterized by the assumption that there is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in reality there are myriad reasons .
That isn ’ t to say that racism doesn ’ t contribute to the underrepresentation of black people in science , but to claim it as the main or only factor is an example of poor critical thinking .
It has also been said that women are massively underrepresented in STEM .
This is true to a certain extent .
Women are underrepresented in engineering and mathematics .
However , they are overrepresented in the life sciences such as biology .
Is there simply no sexism @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we failing to consider other factors ?
Poor critical thinking is neither interesting nor uncommon .
What fascinates me is the idea that black people being underrepresented in science has to be a bad thing .
Why is it assumed that equality of outcome between different peoples should be enforced ?
Why is it assumed that different cultures will produce the same proportion of scientists ?
The black community in America has dominated the music industry in America for decades .
Even while persecuted , the black community managed to outperform their white @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the story of Sammy Davis Jr having to enter a music venue through the back door despite being the star the audience had come to see .
Should music labels reject more black artists because they ’ re overrepresented ?
The Jewish community is overrepresented in the sciences .
Twenty-five percent of Nobel Prize winners in the sciences are/were Jewish .
Should we reduce the number of Jews in science to allow for more black people ?
To demand equality of outcome is an authoritarian argument and an argument that lacks nuance .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of opportunity , and the black community should have access to resources and education akin to their white counterparts .
But affirmative action will not accomplish this goal .

Written by Michael O’Dowd on Jul 7, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
One could argue that the true genesis of mankind was marked not by the emergence of hominids with less body hair or the expansion of the brain, but with the very first question about the world and how it works.
Every civilization has attempted to provide answers, and these answers came in the form of religious doctrine.
Whether it be Prometheus molding the first men from mud or Adam and Eve, humanity has scrambled to find an explanation for the questions that nature continuously poses.
When religious reporting on nature failed to satisfy mankind, another approach was developed. This approach is now known as the scientific method. Within this method, ideas and postulation are given no credence, the scientific method deals only in evidence.
Finally, humanity uncovered some of the answers it desperately sought. Science has provided us with tools that are simply beyond the comprehension of someone from 300 years ago.
Science is arguably the greatest thing humanity has created and is most likely the force that will shape our future.
So why is it that #ShutDownSTEM has materialized on my newsfeed? What does this mean?
The killing of George Floyd has ignited a massive political upheaval, with slogans such as Black Lives Matter and ‘Defund the police’ taking center stage.
The topic of race has infiltrated everyday conversation as well as political dialogue. The concept of systemic/institutional racism is regularly articulated and often accepted as canon.
The scientific community hasn’t escaped judgment. On June 10, academic work was halted for a day in a campaign called #ShutDownSTEM (the acronym meaning science, technology, engineering, and mathematics).
The organizers presented it as an opportunity for scientists and researchers ‘to reflect on their own complicity in anti-Black racism in academia and their local and global communities.’
The evidence put forth to demonstrate the ‘systemic racism’ within science is quite simple: that black people are underrepresented in the sciences.
This is a classic example of the reduction fallacy, also known as the fallacy of the single cause. This is characterized by the assumption that there is a single cause for an outcome when in reality there are myriad reasons.
That isn’t to say that racism doesn’t contribute to the underrepresentation of black people in science, but to claim it as the main or only factor is an example of poor critical thinking.
It has also been said that women are massively underrepresented in STEM. This is true to a certain extent. Women are underrepresented in engineering and mathematics.
However, they are overrepresented in the life sciences such as biology. Is there simply no sexism in the life sciences? Or are we failing to consider other factors?
Poor critical thinking is neither interesting nor uncommon. What fascinates me is the idea that black people being underrepresented in science has to be a bad thing.
Why is it assumed that equality of outcome between different peoples should be enforced? Why is it assumed that different cultures will produce the same proportion of scientists?
The black community in America has dominated the music industry in America for decades. Even while persecuted, the black community managed to outperform their white counterparts.
Many of us have heard the story of Sammy Davis Jr having to enter a music venue through the back door despite being the star the audience had come to see. Should music labels reject more black artists because they’re overrepresented?
The Jewish community is overrepresented in the sciences. Twenty-five percent of Nobel Prize winners in the sciences are/were Jewish. Should we reduce the number of Jews in science to allow for more black people?
To demand equality of outcome is an authoritarian argument and an argument that lacks nuance. The goal is certainly to achieve equality of opportunity, and the black community should have access to resources and education akin to their white counterparts. But affirmative action will not accomplish this goal.
Read more at Conservative Woman
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-07-08--Facebook Censors Activist For Telling Truth About Climate, Extinctions

Written by Michael Shellenberger on .
Posted in Latest news I am writing to inform you that Facebook has inappropriately censored a scientifically accurate article that I wrote at Zero Hedge , Quillette , Environmental Progress , and other websites reprinted .
It is called , “ On Behalf Of Environmentalists , I Apologize For The Climate Scare.
” The article now comes with a warning , which is a form of censorship , as it leads — or , in this case , misleads — the reader to believe that what they are about to read is false .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Apocalypse Never , is a comprehensive review of the scientific evidence on climate change , deforestation , plastic waste , species extinction , and other major environmental topics .
It has been praised by a large number of the world ’ s leading climate and environmental scientists and scholars .
My article made claims that are based directly on the content and references in Apocalypse Never .
The article is accurate , as is my book , which is one of the most thorough reviews of the scientific evidence to date .
However @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to an organization called “ Climate Feedback , ” which is misrepresenting the science examining climate change ’ s impact , or lack thereof , on natural disasters , and other major questions .
For example , my article said , “ Humans are not causing a “ sixth mass extinction , ” which is true .
All major scientific bodies , including the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services ( IPBES ) , reject strongly the idea that humankind is creating a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this science in Apocalypse Never .
As recently as May 4 , 2020 , I asked directly Josef Settle , the co-chair of IPBES , “ Is it scientifically accurate to say humans are causing a sixth great extinction ?
” His answer was , “ It ’ s not ; we don ’ t say that ; it ’ s rather a popular catchy expression… It ’ s not helpful for all of these activities to come across as being alarmist — that ’ s also a matter of credibility .
You @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sixth mass extinction shows up in the media , but not because we said so , rather because certain circles prefer using this term.
” However , Climate Feedback falsely repeats the myth that we are in a sixth great extinction .
Second , the evidence is overwhelming and incontrovertible that the deaths from natural disasters have declined 90 % in 100 years and over 80 % in the last 40 years .
Nobody denies this .
Similarly , nobody denies that the economic cost of natural disasters generally and weather disasters specifically @ @ @ @ @ @ @ normalized to account for much higher levels of wealth .
A peer-reviewed review of the scientific literature concludes that there is “ little evidence to support claims that any part of the overall increase in global economic losses documented on climate time scales can be attributed to human-caused changes in climate , reinforcing conclusions of recent assessments of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
” Climate Feedback is expressing opinions contrary to the latest scientific , peer-reviewed literature .
Climate Feedback is not the first organization to misrepresent the science on species extinctions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I describe the history of such misinformation .
And in a longer document , I have summarized the many more scientific errors that Climate Feedback made in its review of my article .
These issues are important .
Climate change disasters are not killing more people or making disasters more expensive , and yet many people have been misled to believe that is the case .
In January , one out of five British children surveyed told pollsters they were having nightmares about climate change .
And climate alarmism is being used by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ funding from cheap and reliable energy sources for poor nations to expensive and unreliable ones .
I am formally requesting an investigation of this action by Facebook .
Climate Feedback got it wrong , and thus Facebook got it wrong .
Many people only get their news from Facebook , which exercises extraordinary market power , and power over how people decide what is true and false .
I am confident that you take your extraordinary powers extremely seriously .
Michael Shellenberger was Time Magazine ’ s “ Hero of the Environment , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ President of Environmental Progress , a research and policy organization .
He is also the author of several bestselling books.
, his latest being Apocalypse Never .

Written by Michael Shellenberger on Jul 8, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
July 2, 2020
Mark Zuckerberg
Facebook
Via Facebook, Twitter, and email
Dear Mr. Zuckerberg,
I am writing to inform you that Facebook has inappropriately censored a scientifically accurate article that I wrote at Zero Hedge, Quillette, Environmental Progress, and other websites reprinted.
It is called, “On Behalf Of Environmentalists, I Apologize For The Climate Scare.” The article now comes with a warning, which is a form of censorship, as it leads — or, in this case, misleads — the reader to believe that what they are about to read is false.
As background, my new book, Apocalypse Never, is a comprehensive review of the scientific evidence on climate change, deforestation, plastic waste, species extinction, and other major environmental topics. It has been praised by a large number of the world’s leading climate and environmental scientists and scholars.
My article made claims that are based directly on the content and references in Apocalypse Never. The article is accurate, as is my book, which is one of the most thorough reviews of the scientific evidence to date.
However, Facebook has deferred its science fact-checking to an organization called “Climate Feedback,” which is misrepresenting the science examining climate change’s impact, or lack thereof, on natural disasters, and other major questions.
For example, my article said, “Humans are not causing a “sixth mass extinction,” which is true. All major scientific bodies, including the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), reject strongly the idea that humankind is creating a “sixth mass extinction.” I review this science in Apocalypse Never.
As recently as May 4, 2020, I asked directly Josef Settle, the co-chair of IPBES, “Is it scientifically accurate to say humans are causing a sixth great extinction?”
His answer was, “It’s not; we don’t say that; it’s rather a popular catchy expression… It’s not helpful for all of these activities to come across as being alarmist — that’s also a matter of credibility. You have to look at the evidence. Sixth mass extinction shows up in the media, but not because we said so, rather because certain circles prefer using this term.”
However, Climate Feedback falsely repeats the myth that we are in a sixth great extinction.
Second, the evidence is overwhelming and incontrovertible that the deaths from natural disasters have declined 90% in 100 years and over 80% in the last 40 years. Nobody denies this.
Similarly, nobody denies that the economic cost of natural disasters generally and weather disasters specifically have remained flat when the data is normalized to account for much higher levels of wealth.
A peer-reviewed review of the scientific literature concludes that there is “little evidence to support claims that any part of the overall increase in global economic losses documented on climate time scales can be attributed to human-caused changes in climate, reinforcing conclusions of recent assessments of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.”
Climate Feedback is expressing opinions contrary to the latest scientific, peer-reviewed literature.
Climate Feedback is not the first organization to misrepresent the science on species extinctions or disasters. In Apocalypse Never, I describe the history of such misinformation.
And in a longer document, I have summarized the many more scientific errors that Climate Feedback made in its review of my article.
These issues are important. Climate change disasters are not killing more people or making disasters more expensive, and yet many people have been misled to believe that is the case.
In January, one out of five British children surveyed told pollsters they were having nightmares about climate change.
And climate alarmism is being used by the international development banks to justify diverting funding from cheap and reliable energy sources for poor nations to expensive and unreliable ones.
I am formally requesting an investigation of this action by Facebook. Climate Feedback got it wrong, and thus Facebook got it wrong.
Many people only get their news from Facebook, which exercises extraordinary market power, and power over how people decide what is true and false. I am confident that you take your extraordinary powers extremely seriously.
Sincerely,
Michael Shellenberger
Founder and president
Michael Shellenberger was Time Magazine’s “Hero of the Environment,” Green Book Award Winner, and President of Environmental Progress, a research and policy organization. He is also the author of several bestselling books., his latest being Apocalypse Never.
Read more at Environmental Progress
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-07-08--Obama Judges Undermine Pipelines: A ‘Sneak Peek Of The Biden Energy Plan’

Written by Valerie Richardson on .
Posted in Latest news The nation may be awash in oil and natural gas , but U.S. pipelines are running on fumes after three high-profile conduits ran aground in 24 hours , the victims of Obama-appointed judges and regulatory uncertainty under the possibility of a climate-woke Biden presidency .
In this week ’ s triple whammy , a federal judge ordered the 3-year-old Dakota Access Pipeline to empty pending an environmental review .
The Keystone XL pipeline , still under construction , was further delayed after the Supreme Court upheld a lower-court order blocking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Court case last month , Dominion Energy and Duke Energy stunned the industry by abandoning after six years the proposed Atlantic Coast Pipeline , citing the “ increasing legal uncertainty that overhangs large-scale energy and industrial infrastructure development in the United States.
” Environmental activists gushed over the historic three-fer , raising the possibility that the Dakota Access and Keystone XL pipelines could be erased next year by a Biden administration , while Energy Secretary Dan Brouillette blasted the “ well-funded obstructionist environmental lobby ” for killing the Atlantic Coast project .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ judges and special interest litigants are determining the fate of our national and energy security , ” Mr. Brouillette said .
“ These developments should be deeply concerning for every American at every socio-economic level.
” The rulings show that the U.S. pipeline infrastructure has become the soft target for environmental groups seeking to bring down the fossil fuel industry and replace it with renewable energy in the name of fighting climate change .
“ To avoid the worst impacts of the climate crisis , our companies must transition away from the use @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Holzman , energy program manager of As You Sow .
“ Building more gas infrastructure now without a clear justification is a recipe for stranded assets.
” The Sierra Club hailed the cancellation of the $ 8 billion Atlantic Coast project as a “ monumental , historic victory and will have far-reaching implications , ” a “ watershed moment in the fight for climate action ” and “ another indicator of the end of fossil fuels.
” Rep. Dan Crenshaw , Texas Republican , called that view ironic , given that the nation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ emissions , which fell by 12 % from 2005 to 2017 thanks largely to the increased use of natural gas instead of coal in electricity generation .
“ FACT : Natural gas is responsible for majority of emissions reduction over the last 15 years , ” tweeted Mr. Crenshaw .
“ When leftist radicals stop a natural gas pipeline — the safest way to transport natural gas — you have to wonder if they really care about the environment.
” Former Vice President Joseph R. Biden , the presumptive 2020 Democratic presidential nominee @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , he will pull the plug on the Keystone XL pipeline ’ s U.S. leg , which would run shale oil from Canada to Nebraska .
Bill McKibben , the founder of the climate change group 350.org , tweeted that “ if Biden wins it ’ s all over ” for the Keystone XL .
“ Any investor thinking of putting cash into fossil fuel infrastructure projects should be warned they ’ re tossing their money away , ” Mr. McKibben tweeted .
Heartland Institute President James Taylor said Tuesday that “ America @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Joe Biden energy plan : ‘ Better Green than Employed.
’ ” “ Back in December , Biden said he would be willing to sacrifice oil and gas jobs for his green economy , ” Mr. Taylor said .
“ Now , cancellation of the Atlantic Coast pipeline plan cancels 17,000 jobs and $ 2.7 billion in economic activity at a time when the American economy and American workers desperately need some good news.
” Stephen Moore , founder of the Committee to Unleash Prosperity , called the pipeline cancellation “ more evidence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ domestic energy industry will be in rubbles and Saudi Arabia and Russia will be the big winners.
” The Keystone XL was hamstrung in April when U.S. District Court Chief Judge Brian Morris , an Obama appointee , canceled the so-called Nationwide Permit 12 allowing work across waterways .
The Supreme Court on Monday allowed other pipeline projects to proceed while environmental reviews are conducted , but not Keystone XL .
TC Energy in Alberta , Canada , said the company remains committed to the Keystone XL , but will “ continue to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Canada , our work in 2020 remains unchanged.
” Environmentalists said the Dakota Access ruling , which was handed down by U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg , an Obama appointee , ordered the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to prepare an environmental impact statement , which could take years .
“ The shutdown will remain in place pending completion of a full environmental review , which normally takes several years , and the issuance of new permits , ” said Earthjustice , which filed the lawsuit on behalf of the Standing Rock @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It may be up to a new administration to make final permitting decisions.
” Meanwhile , Mr. Brouillette described the decision as a loss for the economies of North Dakota , South Dakota , Iowa , and Illinois .
The 1,172-mile pipeline , which went online in June 2017 , carries oil from North Dakota ’ s Bakken field to oil terminals in Illinois but was challenged by the tribes over fears about environmental damage .
The pipeline runs a half-mile from the Standing Rock reservation in North Dakota .

Written by Valerie Richardson on Jul 8, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
The nation may be awash in oil and natural gas, but U.S. pipelines are running on fumes after three high-profile conduits ran aground in 24 hours, the victims of Obama-appointed judges and regulatory uncertainty under the possibility of a climate-woke Biden presidency.
In this week’s triple whammy, a federal judge ordered the 3-year-old Dakota Access Pipeline to empty pending an environmental review. The Keystone XL pipeline, still under construction, was further delayed after the Supreme Court upheld a lower-court order blocking a permit.
Despite winning a Supreme Court case last month, Dominion Energy and Duke Energy stunned the industry by abandoning after six years the proposed Atlantic Coast Pipeline, citing the “increasing legal uncertainty that overhangs large-scale energy and industrial infrastructure development in the United States.”
Environmental activists gushed over the historic three-fer, raising the possibility that the Dakota Access and Keystone XL pipelines could be erased next year by a Biden administration, while Energy Secretary Dan Brouillette blasted the “well-funded obstructionist environmental lobby” for killing the Atlantic Coast project.
The decisions were “more reminders that activist judges and special interest litigants are determining the fate of our national and energy security,” Mr. Brouillette said. “These developments should be deeply concerning for every American at every socio-economic level.”
The rulings show that the U.S. pipeline infrastructure has become the soft target for environmental groups seeking to bring down the fossil fuel industry and replace it with renewable energy in the name of fighting climate change.
“To avoid the worst impacts of the climate crisis, our companies must transition away from the use of fossil fuels,” said Lila Holzman, energy program manager of As You Sow. “Building more gas infrastructure now without a clear justification is a recipe for stranded assets.”
The Sierra Club hailed the cancellation of the $8 billion Atlantic Coast project as a “monumental, historic victory and will have far-reaching implications,” a “watershed moment in the fight for climate action” and “another indicator of the end of fossil fuels.”
Rep. Dan Crenshaw, Texas Republican, called that view ironic, given that the nation leads the world in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, which fell by 12% from 2005 to 2017 thanks largely to the increased use of natural gas instead of coal in electricity generation.
“FACT: Natural gas is responsible for majority of emissions reduction over the last 15 years,” tweeted Mr. Crenshaw. “When leftist radicals stop a natural gas pipeline — the safest way to transport natural gas — you have to wonder if they really care about the environment.”
Former Vice President Joseph R. Biden, the presumptive 2020 Democratic presidential nominee, has vowed that if he wins, he will pull the plug on the Keystone XL pipeline’s U.S. leg, which would run shale oil from Canada to Nebraska.
Bill McKibben, the founder of the climate change group 350.org, tweeted that “if Biden wins it’s all over” for the Keystone XL.
“Any investor thinking of putting cash into fossil fuel infrastructure projects should be warned they’re tossing their money away,” Mr. McKibben tweeted.
Heartland Institute President James Taylor said Tuesday that “America just got a sneak peek of the Joe Biden energy plan: ‘Better Green than Employed.’”
“Back in December, Biden said he would be willing to sacrifice oil and gas jobs for his green economy,” Mr. Taylor said. “Now, cancellation of the Atlantic Coast pipeline plan cancels 17,000 jobs and $2.7 billion in economic activity at a time when the American economy and American workers desperately need some good news.”
Stephen Moore, founder of the Committee to Unleash Prosperity, called the pipeline cancellation “more evidence that if Biden wins in November our domestic energy industry will be in rubbles and Saudi Arabia and Russia will be the big winners.”
The Keystone XL was hamstrung in April when U.S. District Court Chief Judge Brian Morris, an Obama appointee, canceled the so-called Nationwide Permit 12 allowing work across waterways.
The Supreme Court on Monday allowed other pipeline projects to proceed while environmental reviews are conducted, but not Keystone XL.
TC Energy in Alberta, Canada, said the company remains committed to the Keystone XL, but will “continue to evaluate our 2020 U.S. scope. In Canada, our work in 2020 remains unchanged.”
Environmentalists said the Dakota Access ruling, which was handed down by U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg, an Obama appointee, ordered the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to prepare an environmental impact statement, which could take years.
“The shutdown will remain in place pending completion of a full environmental review, which normally takes several years, and the issuance of new permits,” said Earthjustice, which filed the lawsuit on behalf of the Standing Rock and Cheyenne River Sioux tribes. “It may be up to a new administration to make final permitting decisions.”
Meanwhile, Mr. Brouillette described the decision as a loss for the economies of North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, and Illinois.
The 1,172-mile pipeline, which went online in June 2017, carries oil from North Dakota’s Bakken field to oil terminals in Illinois but was challenged by the tribes over fears about environmental damage. The pipeline runs a half-mile from the Standing Rock reservation in North Dakota.
Read rest at Washington Times
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-07-08--To Defeat The Climate Cult, Realists Need To Unite, Speak Out

Written by Clarice Feldman on .
Posted in Latest news Much is made of the fact that former “ climate change ” advocates have now defected to the side of reason .
But much more needs to be done to defeat climate change propaganda .
The latest defection , as we ’ ve noted here , is Michael Shellenberger , author of Apocalypse Never : Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All .
His arguments are well-documented but he ’ s been denied a voice in the major media .
The major media shut-outs are not the only way climate-change skeptics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ studies , and critiques of the prevailing view silenced .
The most important search engine , Google does it , too .
David Wojick tested it by searching his own works and those of other climate change skeptics on Google .
The pattern is obvious — attack the skeptics of climate change alarmism .
The ever-present use of the wacko DeSmogBlog attacks , usually in the top 5 items and often first or second , is actually pretty funny .
But it is also telling , as is the going back many years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the informational pieces are far more recent .
This pattern can not be accidental ; the algorithm is clearly tuned to discredit skeptics of climate change alarmism .
The interesting question : is this illegal ?
After all , Google boasts that it has billions of dollars invested in renewable energy .
Skepticism of alarmism probably threatens those investments .
Deliberately discrediting people in order to protect or enhance your business interests sounds illegal to me .
Maybe there is even a class action suit in this .
This censoring of contrary opinion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ matter of free speech and inquiry .
It ’ s critical because it ’ s likely to be the next woke campaign—overturning western civilization by piling on the moral panic which has already led to such absurdities as denouncing terms like “ master bedroom ” and “ blacklisting ” and demolishing statues of abolitionists because of some fancied connotations of slavery and racism .
( I did Google Michael Shellenberger and see Google ’ s algorithms have not yet made him a non-person .
His most recent works and statements are at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ skeptics is or should be of interest to more than those of us interested in this issue .
It ’ s likely to be the next “ woke ” campaign theme .
And the censoring is likely to be even more extreme .
Using the Forbes deletion of Shellenberger ’ s article as a warning , the author , Ross Clark , concludes : A US journalist who tried to find out why was issued only with the following statement : ‘ Forbes requires its contributors to adhere to strict editorial guidelines .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and was removed.
’ It is not hard to decode : a bunch of climate alarmists decided that Shellenberger is inconvenient to their cause and have tried to cancel him by complaining to the website – and the website caved in… The attempt to classify climate change ‘ denialism ’ as a hate crime has been coming for quite a while .
The very use of the word ‘ denial ’ is an attempt to put anyone skeptical of climate alarmism in the same pigeonhole as holocaust deniers .
There are so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ including The Pipeline , Wattsupwiththat , Climate Change Dispatch , and Climate Audit , for example , the question no longer is who can refute the silliness of the doomsday movement , but how can we make our voices heard in the face of the media-attempted blackout and the education establishments ’ embrace of climate alarmism ?
Schoolchildren are especially vulnerable to the climate-change movement , which is the genius of using Greta Thunberg to appeal to the public on this issue .
She ’ s a modern Stephen of Cloyes who ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ endeavor—in this case abolishing the fossil fuels that keep us living well .
Her backers use her to inspire a repeat of the ill-fated Children ’ s ’ Crusade , because children are so lacking in knowledge and experience an emotional appeal is most effective on them .
So , how do we reach the young formative minds ?
I went to the National Education Association ’ s website for its statement : “ Climate Change Education : Essential Information for Educators.
” It directs teachers to a series of reports by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and the KQED Education network .
Picking one such study at random , the NOAA study , teachers will learn things like this : Or , to take a second example , the KQED Education Network : The NEA lists its “ Green Partners , ” among them : I stopped at the first , Earth Day Network , where I learned , “ Our food system accounts for more than a quarter of all greenhouse gas emissions , making animal agriculture one of the largest contributors to climate change .
Food @ @ @ @ @ @ @ planet .
And what we ’ re eating is pushing the planet to the breaking point on climate change and deforestation.
” My point is as far as I can tell , the NEA guides for teachers rely on sources in which no countervailing opinions seem readily to appear , and often make assertions of fact which are simply untrue .
This underscores what Paul Driessen wrote last year .
From kindergarten onward , our young people are repeatedly told that they , our wildlife and our planet face unprecedented cataclysms from manmade @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fuel use .
The science is settled , they are constantly hoodwinked , and little or no discussion is allowed in classrooms .
They thus hear virtually nothing about the growing gap between computer model predictions and satellite temperature measurements ; questions about data manipulation by scientists advocating the dangerous manmade climate change narrative ; the hundreds of scientists who do not agree with the supposed “ consensus ” on manmade climate chaos ; or the absence of any real-world evidence to support claims of carbon dioxide-driven coral bleaching , species extinctions , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more absurd assertions that fossil fuel emissions are making sharks right-handed , arctic plants too tall , pigs skinnier and salmon unable to detect danger , to cite just a few crazy examples .
It all seems hopeless .
I haven ’ t any brilliant notions of how to combat this propagandizing and enlisting half-formed student minds to the cause , but it should start with pressuring our federal agencies to stop producing and promoting on its own fact-free propaganda , and funding outside groups to do the same .
The agencies producing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be monitored and forced to provide in its place more objective , documented material for the public .
The NEA needs to be challenged regarding the sites and material it is endorsing .
If you encourage teachers to teach nonsense , you ’ re paying them to miseducate their students .
There is a multi-state effort to create new education standards that are “ rich in content and practice , arranged in a coherent manner across disciplines and grades to provide all students an internationally benchmarked science education.
” A glance at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ far more objective than the NEA site .
States that have not signed on to this should be encouraged to do so .
Perhaps all of the climate-change-skeptical sites should consider a feature occasionally explaining the truth of “ man-made climate change ” in terms that children ( and their parents ) can understand , a sort of Scholastic-Science feature now and then .
In the meantime , the climate cult is turning out students like those at Milwaukee ’ s North Division High School , which holds regular school-sanctioned walkouts on topics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ student out of 105 there are proficient in English and only two are proficient in math . )
Its most recent teacher-approved Red Guard-like march of the Milwaukee Public Schools was organized by “ The People ’ s Climate Coalition ” and specifically targeted Wells Fargo and Chase banks .
Apparently they were singled out because they supposedly provided funding for fossil fuel companies .
Parents and citizens should challenge the manipulation of students who certainly do not need time away from school to serve as leftist foot soldiers .
We skeptics can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we mean to bring greater support for rational energy and environmental policies , and we can ’ t persuade others they are being duped and misinformed if we don ’ t do more .
Read more at The Pipeline

Written by Clarice Feldman on Jul 8, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
Much is made of the fact that former “climate change” advocates have now defected to the side of reason. But much more needs to be done to defeat climate change propaganda.
The latest defection, as we’ve noted here, is Michael Shellenberger, author of Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All. His arguments are well-documented but he’s been denied a voice in the major media.
The major media shut-outs are not the only way climate-change skeptics are made non-persons and their arguments, studies, and critiques of the prevailing view silenced.
The most important search engine, Google does it, too. David Wojick tested it by searching his own works and those of other climate change skeptics on Google.
The pattern is obvious — attack the skeptics of climate change alarmism. The ever-present use of the wacko DeSmogBlog attacks, usually in the top 5 items and often first or second, is actually pretty funny.
But it is also telling, as is the going back many years to pick up attack pieces, while the informational pieces are far more recent. This pattern cannot be accidental; the algorithm is clearly tuned to discredit skeptics of climate change alarmism.
The interesting question: is this illegal? After all, Google boasts that it has billions of dollars invested in renewable energy. Skepticism of alarmism probably threatens those investments.
Deliberately discrediting people in order to protect or enhance your business interests sounds illegal to me. Maybe there is even a class action suit in this.
This censoring of contrary opinion on climate change is not merely a matter of free speech and inquiry.
It’s critical because it’s likely to be the next woke campaign—overturning western civilization by piling on the moral panic which has already led to such absurdities as denouncing terms like “master bedroom” and “blacklisting” and demolishing statues of abolitionists because of some fancied connotations of slavery and racism. (I did Google Michael Shellenberger and see Google’s algorithms have not yet made him a non-person. His most recent works and statements are at the top.)
The censoring of climate skeptics is or should be of interest to more than those of us interested in this issue. It’s likely to be the next “woke” campaign theme.
And the censoring is likely to be even more extreme. Using the Forbes deletion of Shellenberger’s article as a warning, the author, Ross Clark, concludes:
A US journalist who tried to find out why was issued only with the following statement: ‘Forbes requires its contributors to adhere to strict editorial guidelines. This story did not follow those guidelines, and was removed.’ It is not hard to decode: a bunch of climate alarmists decided that Shellenberger is inconvenient to their cause and have tried to cancel him by complaining to the website – and the website caved in… The attempt to classify climate change ‘denialism’ as a hate crime has been coming for quite a while. The very use of the word ‘denial’ is an attempt to put anyone skeptical of climate alarmism in the same pigeonhole as holocaust deniers.
There are so many fine blogs on the subject, including The Pipeline, Wattsupwiththat, Climate Change Dispatch, and Climate Audit, for example, the question no longer is who can refute the silliness of the doomsday movement, but how can we make our voices heard in the face of the media-attempted blackout and the education establishments’ embrace of climate alarmism?
Schoolchildren are especially vulnerable to the climate-change movement, which is the genius of using Greta Thunberg to appeal to the public on this issue.
She’s a modern Stephen of Cloyes who’d lead frenetic children on a disastrous endeavor—in this case abolishing the fossil fuels that keep us living well.
Her backers use her to inspire a repeat of the ill-fated Children’s’ Crusade, because children are so lacking in knowledge and experience an emotional appeal is most effective on them.
So, how do we reach the young formative minds? I went to the National Education Association’s website for its statement: “Climate Change Education: Essential Information for Educators.”
It directs teachers to a series of reports by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, PBS, and the KQED Education network. Picking one such study at random, the NOAA study, teachers will learn things like this:
Impacts from climate change are happening now. These impacts extend well beyond an increase in temperature, affecting ecosystems and communities in the United States and around the world. Things that we depend upon and value — water, energy, transportation, wildlife, agriculture, ecosystems, and human health — are experiencing the effects of a changing climate.
Or, to take a second example, the KQED Education Network:
Scientists around the globe have noticed that over the last 40 years Earth, as a whole, has been warming. This phenomenon, known as global warming, is affecting regional climates differently. For example, some regions may experience warmer summers, while other regions may see winters with heavier snowstorms. A rise in Earth’s average temperature isn’t always immediately apparent. For example, some places still get snowy winters, which might appear to contradict the idea of global warming. (Check out Andy Warner’s comic to learn how global warming can actually lead to heavier snowfall). So, how do scientists know Earth is warming?
The NEA lists its “Green Partners,” among them:
I stopped at the first, Earth Day Network, where I learned, “Our food system accounts for more than a quarter of all greenhouse gas emissions, making animal agriculture one of the largest contributors to climate change. Food production and consumption are rapidly deteriorating the planet. And what we’re eating is pushing the planet to the breaking point on climate change and deforestation.”
My point is as far as I can tell, the NEA guides for teachers rely on sources in which no countervailing opinions seem readily to appear, and often make assertions of fact which are simply untrue.
This underscores what Paul Driessen wrote last year.
From kindergarten onward, our young people are repeatedly told that they, our wildlife and our planet face unprecedented cataclysms from manmade climate change, resulting from our fossil fuel use. The science is settled, they are constantly hoodwinked, and little or no discussion is allowed in classrooms. They thus hear virtually nothing about the growing gap between computer model predictions and satellite temperature measurements; questions about data manipulation by scientists advocating the dangerous manmade climate change narrative; the hundreds of scientists who do not agree with the supposed “consensus” on manmade climate chaos; or the absence of any real-world evidence to support claims of carbon dioxide-driven coral bleaching, species extinctions, or the seemingly endless litany of ever more absurd assertions that fossil fuel emissions are making sharks right-handed, arctic plants too tall, pigs skinnier and salmon unable to detect danger, to cite just a few crazy examples.
It all seems hopeless.
I haven’t any brilliant notions of how to combat this propagandizing and enlisting half-formed student minds to the cause, but it should start with pressuring our federal agencies to stop producing and promoting on its own fact-free propaganda, and funding outside groups to do the same.
The agencies producing the pap the NEA recommends need to be monitored and forced to provide in its place more objective, documented material for the public.
The NEA needs to be challenged regarding the sites and material it is endorsing. If you encourage teachers to teach nonsense, you’re paying them to miseducate their students.
There is a multi-state effort to create new education standards that are “rich in content and practice, arranged in a coherent manner across disciplines and grades to provide all students an internationally benchmarked science education.”
A glance at the standards, arranged by grades, seems far more objective than the NEA site. States that have not signed on to this should be encouraged to do so.
Perhaps all of the climate-change-skeptical sites should consider a feature occasionally explaining the truth of “man-made climate change” in terms that children (and their parents) can understand, a sort of Scholastic-Science feature now and then.
In the meantime, the climate cult is turning out students like those at Milwaukee’s North Division High School, which holds regular school-sanctioned walkouts on topics like Climate Activism. (Only one student out of 105 there are proficient in English and only two are proficient in math.)
Its most recent teacher-approved Red Guard-like march of the Milwaukee Public Schools was organized by “The People’s Climate Coalition” and specifically targeted Wells Fargo and Chase banks.
Apparently they were singled out because they supposedly provided funding for fossil fuel companies. Parents and citizens should challenge the manipulation of students who certainly do not need time away from school to serve as leftist foot soldiers.
We skeptics can’t just talk to ourselves if we mean to bring greater support for rational energy and environmental policies, and we can’t persuade others they are being duped and misinformed if we don’t do more.
Read more at The Pipeline
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print