Our old friend Stephan Lewandowsky has had a brain wave: h/t to Geoff Chambers and Barry Woods.
This Bristol academic thinks he has the solution to fake news
A Bristol professor has told MPs they have the power to put a stop to fake news appearing on Facebook and other social media platforms.
It is possible for a regulation or law to be passed that tells those IT giants how to behave,” said the cognitive scientist,…
Knock me over. Who would have thought of that — apart from every dictator and tyrant for the last 5,000 years?
His big new idea has been done before:
…libraries in the Soviet Union were repeatedly purged of all books deemed “harmful”. … between 1930 and 1932, libraries lost sixty percent more of their stock that was already purged at least three times.
So Lewandowsky has turned up to the UK Parliament to tell politicians what politicians have known since 3,000BC.
But his new job title is oh-so-apt:
Professor Stephan Lewandowsky, an expert in “misinformation” at Bristol University, said MPs could bring in laws to prevent anything that amounted to “hate speech” – a move already undertaken by law-makers in Germany.
“And guess what? Facebook hired the people to make that happen.”
Yes, let’s look at Germany. In 2017 the government slammed a 50 million Euro fine on social media companies for libel, slander, defamation, incitement, and they only have 24 hours to remove it after a complaint, “regardless of whether the content is accurate.”
Judith Bergman tells us the effect:
This state censorship makes free speech subject to the arbitrary decisions of corporate entities that are likely to censor more than absolutely necessary, rather than risk a crushing fine. When employees of social media companies are appointed as the state’s private thought police and given the power to shape the form of current political and cultural discourse by deciding who shall be allowed to speak and what to say, and who shall be shut down, free speech becomes nothing more than a fairy tale.
Meanwhile, the district court in Munich recently gave a German journalist, Michael Stürzenberger, a six-month suspended jail sentence for posting on his Facebook page a historical photo of the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, shaking the hand of a senior Nazi official in Berlin in 1941.
The court found Stürzenberger guilty of “disseminating the propaganda of anti-constitutional organizations”. While the mutual admiration that once existed between al-Husseini and German Nazis is an undisputed historical fact, now evidently history is being rewritten…
Lewandowsky plan: Censorship, 1: Truth, 0.
But wait, it’s not censorship, because Lewandowsky says so. Back to the Bristol Post:
The city academic, who has previously worked in both Australia and the US, said social media outlets should not be censored but called for stronger “regulation” of the big players.
Well, that’s alright then. If we redefine the word censor to mean something completely different, he would be correct. But what about the truth of what the word censorship used to mean?
Wait for the grand insight from the “expert on misinformation”:
Prof Lewandowsky said … the “very concept of the knowability of truth” was now “under attack” in UK society.
Yes, Truth itself is under attack, and Lewandowsky is apparently the one doing it.
Copy Germany, he says; speak the truth and end up in jail?
The genius back up plan is to get there first with a smear by association:
The sneaky other plan from Lewandowsky himself:
Get to people before the misinformation does, then there’s evidence to show that they will be able to filter it out better. One example is a recent study which I published with colleagues last year where we told people about the way the tobacco industry in the 50s and 60s was trying to create the appearance of a scientific debate about tobacco, when in fact the science was quite clear. Once you remind people of that precedent they then became extremely resilient to misinformation about climate change which followed the same playbook. So it is possible to give people inoculation like a vaccine almost against misinformation by pointing to specific rhetorical strategies that are misleading. But you have to get to them first.
Go right ahead, Stephan. Rush in with your logical fallacy. People will be “extremely resilient” until the next person points out that any professor calling people “climate deniers” and confusing tobacco with the planetary climate is not much of a scientist. Say, let’s use the handy Tobacco Tool of Truth! Cut through complex debates in an instant. Doctors are always right, have some Vioxx. The Government is always right, eat more margarine! Renewables are cheap, pay your electricity bill.
But seriously, it’s true that paid hacks from Big Tobacco were trying to create the illusion of debate. But what stops paid hacks from multinational-renewables firms trying to falsely create the illusion that there’s no debate? You know, the science is clear, wind farms will fix the climate! (Give us your money).
Big-Renewables was a $326 billion dollar industry last time I looked at it. That’s not too shabby. Using the Tobacco Truth wand and language of that battle, Panasonic, big battery maker, “buys” public experts who suggest that “The Science” says we need electric cars and solar panels.
When nice honest people explain why his trick is a cheap smear by association — blurring tobacco, holocaust deniers and skeptical scientists (who walked on the moon and won real Nobel Prizes), the post-post-Lewandowsky crowd will be inoculated (so to speak) — against his cheap propaganda.
Free speech works both ways, but only one side of the debate is afraid to let the other speak.
I am reminded about the plot hatched by former Labor Prime Minister Gillard and the Minister for Communications Conroy who wanted to introduce censorship to the internet for Australians to be controlled via the government owned private company NBNCo.
Censorship was rejected by parliamentarians and was quietly dropped.
251
Although we *do* have metadata retention which is as good as a veiled threat hanging over everyones head really….
The best benefit of a single pipe, is that its easier to choke off the information supply, or, ban you from using it. A very useful censorship and control tool, loved and approved by dictators for millenia.
As someone who works in enterprise level IT, there are some eye watering true stories about this sort of stuff.
100
Don’t forget that the Gillard government was also exploring legislation to put a Media Review Board in place to review newspapers and TV stations that didn’t toe the line. Fortunately that was dropped when it appeared her own party would not support such a law. You can’t make this stuff up.
121
Two names I hope to never hear of again. How she managed to escape a guilty decision reeks of something like .. Political/Judicial shenanigans.
53
Don’t forget, she was ‘Young and Naïve’ at the time, which of course explains everything.
Also, misogyny.
And if you need more proof of her unicorns and rainbows, remember she was born in Wales and the English oppressed the Welsh back in the 1300s. Need we say more.
43
Well, worth adding that she was a friend of Hillary Clinton.
Has the Australian government stopped sending your tax dollars to the Clinton Foundation yet? They will need help with the legal bills.
41
I understand that particular flow of “sponsorship” for the Clinton Foundation has now been, er, somewhat reduced, now that the foundation, with its corporate and government sponsors, is er, somewhat under investigation.
This will end up as the impeachment you have, when you are not having an impeachment. Clayton’s, anyone?
41
I bet UWA cringe at the association of Lew paper and their good name. I bet they now do!! Those that matter, those that are real thinkers..
11
At our wonderful Rereke#1.3.1.1.1….As a foreigner I never understood the whole Claytons thing Rereke. It’s almost as if you lot were sort of kidding yourselves that you weren’t kidding yourselves if you Know wha I mean like…
BTW love the idea that Clintons can’t even be protected by Lemons at CNN. For American readers, to accuse someone of being a ‘Lemon’ is to accuse them of being a weak failure.
10
Check this out for the Gillard Obama “kissy” pic, don’t eat first…
https://realclimatescience.com/2016/12/more-junk-science-from-peter-hannam-and-the-sydney-morning-herald/
Also a good read, Tony Thomas on Gillard/Clinton, http://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2016/07/gillard/
01
Glen
See Michael Smith News today
00
Lets not forget the 2012 Finkelstein Report of the independent inquiry into media regulation, if that didn’t set off alarms as to the future visions of society through the eyes of would be autocratic elites then nothing will.
00
Right now the Lewindowskis hold the upper hand. And they got it by corrupting our education.
In Australia we have seen a series of landslide election victories by conservative interests reversed at the very next election. This can only be explained by deep seated prejudices held by 51% of the electorate.
We can expect that the promotion this week of electric cars might bring a showdown in our government. If the current clique retains control, it won’t be only the Queensland government that blocks access to the JoNova blog.
201
Oh dear. Pushed the wrong button before proof read. Could have been worse!
60
Yes, most of us, including most governments are in favour of nice ideals like “world peace” and reducing pollution. Actually implementing them though is a totally different matter due to a number of reasons, not the least of which are ignorance of the facts, conflicting priorities (eg, career politicians and scientists) and lack of critical thinking.
180
Lewandowsky’s extraordinary views explained by Prof Jordan Petersen in the car crash interview with the BBC’s Cathy Newman at 24:00.
“their philosophy presumes that group identify is paramount. That’s the fundamental philosophy which drove the Soviet Union and Maoist China and is the fundamental philosophy of the left wing activist. It’s identity politics. It doesn’t matter who you are as an individual. It matters who you are in terms of your group identity. ”
So Lewandowsky is free to borrow from the Third Reich or Stalin or Mao to repress individual and expert opinion. Over 100 million people died. Anyone who disagrees with the identity politics of Global Warming should be silenced. Who needs facts? The self righteousness of the extreme left knows no bounds. They want to define truth legally and burn books. Anyone who dares disagree will be silenced. The ground work is being laid for a totatitarian state.
This now applies to Climate Change, an extreme left fabrication of the UN’s own Inter Governmental Panel on Climate Change. The IPCC created in 1988 is a purely political body run by unqualified bureaucrats like Christiana Figueres, not one of them a scientist. She has stated openly it is not about the Climate but about redistribution of wealth, straight from the extreme left handbook.
Figureres is the daughter and sister of former Presidents of Costa Rica and an anthropologist. Our equally qualified but less privileged chief climate commissioner studied ancient kangaroos. Lewandowsky is an Australian
“experimental psychologist” another self proclaimed expert in Climate Change and who seeks to advise governments on how to deal with dissenters. None are scientists. The truth needs to be made law. Deniers must be denied a voice, for now. Dissent will not be tolerated.
351
TdeF:
A minor correction to improve the accuracy and give better than 98% certainty:
Ms Figueres was the
and mostly responsible for the Paris Accord (2015) and
which apparently
Right. Must protect those elite wallets …
Seems to be a leading protagonist against the Internal Combustion Engine.
(For more, see her online website …)
The UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) is the IPCC’s Client organisation, for whom the IPCC supposedly
bends, distorts mangles disguises and rejects truthconducts research and writes thepropagandareports about the state of an imaginary climate (to a 95% or better “certainty”). The IPCC “authors” are a 97% consensus of the world’s klimatescientistsstudents.</sarc>
151
She has also been involved in carbon credits for a long time, not least as a colleague of Lord Stern at Idea Carbon:
https://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/person.asp?personId=22475933&privcapId=46057352&previousCapId=46057352&previousTitle=IDEAcarbon%20Ltd.
http://www.mondovisione.com/news/costa-rica-climate-change-negotiator-and-former-carbon-rating-agency-vice-chair-/
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2008/jun/15/carbonoffsetprojects.carbonemissions
Brother Jose was head of Branson’s Carbon War Room: http://www.climateactionprogramme.org/climate-leader-interviews/the_low_carbon_future_the_carbon_war_room_presiedent_jose_maria_figueres_sp
00
Nice summary TdeF, thanks.
Lewandowsky is not competent in any physical science; he lacks the background, training, and experience.
But he may be competent as a tool of totalitarians in molding a part of the public to accept totalitarian rule of those who have a bias (i.e. those that think they will be powerful in the tyrannical government and wind up rich and famous) and he may also be successful in duping those who are innumerate, or trained in such fields as journalism and have no idea what real science is.
But if he has to compete with real scientists in an honest arena, he is helpless and foolish. Those not endowed with the intelligence to understand good physical science either accept it and stick to their own business or they seek undue and dishonest dominance over others through tyranny.
90
“Lewandowsky is free to borrow from the Third Reich or Stalin or Mao”
The Stalin analogy fits perfectly. This whole CAGW project is a modern version of Lysenkoism.
“Lysenkoism (Russian: Лысе́нковщина, lysenkovshchina) was a political campaign against genetics and science-based agriculture conducted by Trofim Lysenko, his followers and Soviet authorities. Lysenko served as the director of the Soviet Union’s Lenin All-Union Academy of Agricultural Sciences. Lysenkoism began in the late 1920s and formally ended in 1964. The term Lysenkoism can also be used metaphorically to describe the manipulation or distortion of the scientific process as a way to reach a predetermined conclusion as dictated by an ideological bias, often related to social or political objectives.”
https://infogalactic.com/info/Lysenkoism
P.S. This source is what appears to be a much less censored version of Wikipedia. Haven’t used it much yet but so far so good.
30
An excellent article Jo and thanks TdeF for the supplement.
It seems that the older I get the more I see of one of the basic truths about the human condition.
Which is: That there is a large portion of society which needs leadership because they lack the motivation or skill to be able to sort reality out for themselves.
These people are vulnerable and perhaps the best word to describe them is Sheeple.
The big problem is that they vote and are easily manipulated by the ABCCC or UNIPCCC and the host of other bloodsucking authority figures.
Solution has been a long time coming.
KK
240
The problem of course is the sheeple vote the government they prefer to lead them. As long as they keep voting LNP/ALP things will only get worse, with the occasional counter-trend up move in the economy as we are somewhat experiencing at the moment, no thanks to them. We are simply riding the coattails of the booming US economy, which as always is temporary. The solution is not as simple as you indicate because the very people the sheeple vote into power are themselves now sheeple. That’s the conundrum we face as a nation. The most apt description overall is we are generally in a death spiral, and we have to weather whatever eventuates. Then the cycle starts again after the reset.
90
Hi Peter
I don’t think I’ve suggested a solution to the problem, that’s way beyond my understanding.
As you say, the two major parties are definitely not the solution.
When you think of our recent federal leaders, Gillard, Rudd, Shorten and Turnbull, it would be hard to see any one of them relating in any way to the man in the street.
And they get elected??
🙂
130
We get the government we deserve simply because we now keep electing same old instead looking outside the box. Like a lot of things after we have been used to something for a long time, such as democracy, we end up becoming complacent and end up abusing it instead of using it wisely with a thinking mindset. So i appears we have to go through a disruptive period to wake us up and remember why in the past we went to war defending our democracy, instead of doing the very thing our enemies tried and failed to do in the first place, namely destroy our nation. Most people today are still too busy enjoying the fruits of our past successes as though it will never end, yet the reality is we are blindly heading for the edge of the cliff at light speed. I doubt very much we will collectively see it coming and decide to alter direction quick enough to avoid it. For starters our nation debt is skyrocketing and anyone who believes we can reverse it is dreaming. How long we can keep spending money we don’t have before the debt bomb explodes in our faces is not clear. Whenever it is it won’t be pretty. This is just one facet of the problems we face today, and it’s not even the biggest one. A bigger one is the breakdown of society due to an ever changing landscape of morals and ethics to the point where it eventually doesn’t matter what one defines is good or evil as it will all be just a matter of opinion and personal choice. We are witnessing the leading edge of this today.
40
We need a new “guiding light”.
Unfortunately the public have to contend with the unchanging media attitude that enforces compliance with what can be said in discussions.
An example of what I’m talking about is illustrated in the link given by TdeF above. She’s dressed in blue and seems like how you might describe an attack dog.
30
The problem is, it seems the higher up the pile you go, it seems to me that its because of undesriable traits that usually are found in psychologists and pyschiatrists’ text books.
My thought is that people need leadership, but many people higher up are there becasue they are ruthless and are wolves, not shepherds.
The Elite seem to engage in society wide abuse of trust and position, as ever the human condition, and if you add mental conditions into it, its a high level version of “that kid” who enjoyed pulling wings off flies….
The dumb nasties wind up in prison, the smartones become sociptahs and psychopaths. Business is full of them. My wife recently had to deal with a sociopath, they have little empathy apart frommaking themselves look good. They have strong narcistic tendencies and cant be trusted, but can charm the birds out of the trees, while stabbing any threat in the back.
Does any of this sound familiar?
60
The problem is that society is neatly split between two personality types. Type one is analytical, the individual, self driven, self motivated, self introspective. Type two is emotional, want to feel safe, feel comfortable, they don’t want to (or can’t) think a thing through, they want someone to tell them what the truth is.
This yin/yang is what has caused all the conflict through the ages.
150
There is a third type that is self taught, unpretentious and a critical thinker who continues to strive for as much of the truth as possible regardless of the propaganda being poured out by the MSM, teaching institutions and politicians. Such a person requires to study at depth many areas, such as literature, history and science in their unadulterated form. The yin/yang principle never leads to a clear and final winner and just leads to repeated ups and downs over long periods but the cycle can’t keep going on forever because eventually the whole world will self destruct given enough time. The third type needs to break the deadlock.
42
‘Here’s the church
and here’s the steeple.
open the doors and
here’s the sheeple.’
91
Some would describe the division as the difference between “K” and “r” reproductive strategies, and the associated philosophy and political leanings. These two reproductive strategies are always at war with each other, no matter what species, so that’s not going to change. Both are successful at reproducing… so neither type is going to die out either. Nor is either side going to convince the other that they’re “wrong” in any meaningful sense, because from a reproductive point of view, neither is wrong. So the battle rages on…
10
Google just pulled its attempt at fake-news fact-checking, as the processes were so flawed that it was removing (conservative) sites reporting verifiable facts: http://dailycaller.com/2018/01/19/google-ends-fact-check/.
100
Here’s a handy way of replicating that study of Lew’s on mental “inoculation.” Instead of talking about the tobacco industry, tell people about the way psychology professor Cyril Burt in the 40s and 50s wrote multiple dubious articles when in fact the science was far from clear. Once you remind people of that precedent they may become extremely resilient to misinformation from another psychology professor which follows the same playbook.
40
the way the tobacco industry in the 50s and 60s was trying to create the appearance of a scientific debate about tobacco
My mother smoked and died of lung cancer.
While she was alive, we joked that she quit 7 times.
My father came home from work one day and said “I’m quitting smoking.”
He quit – no problem no issues.
My point is, regular people knew smoking was bad for one’s health.
Health folks, companies, and politicians rattled on about this for years.
Even now, as far as I know, no country has banned tobacco.
It is not about science.
Likewise, CAGW is not science.
Stephan Lewandowsky is on the “climate science” wall of shame, along with Peter Gleick, John Cook, Al Gore, Bill Nye, .. {add others here} .., and M. Mann.
233
You referred to Al Gore, I read recently that the Commonwealth of Australia Government, Minister for Foreign Affairs Julie Bishop responsible, has entered into an agreement with Al Gore to fund a programme to eradicate Malaria in Asia Pacific Region.
With due regard for funding arrangements by our federal governments over years past involving the Clinton Foundation and similar funding projects that appear to compete with existing Australian Government foreign aid projects the above announcement surprised me.
70
Apologies, it was Bill Gates not Al Gore.
60
Will they employ DDT?
40
Julie Bishop is DDT.
20
Such a noble cause. Hang on, what’s that scent?
sniff? sniff!
Ah.
I suspect a scheme for farming tax breaks, government subsidies and maybe private donations not just around the Asia Pacific region, while the mosquitoes whine from success to success.
100
We, used to refer to cigarettes as cancer sticks! Everyone knew of the dangers and smoked anyway. The point is everone knew of the dangers and no manipulation was required. Likewise climate change most people realise it is natural and mankind has very little influence. Time will tell.
Petertl
20
Why would they even bother to try to institute official censorship when the press smothers politically incorrect truth so well already.
Look at the climategate emails, or look at the current failure to notice the Nunes memo in the US. They’d only be drawing attention to truth if they try to censor it.
60
Because they are self-righteous.
And this is a Noble Cause.
Truth; according to Lewandowsky, is whatever he believes.
If only they could see themselves in the mirror, they would be horrified.
30
If you look carefully it becomes obvious that sections of the MSM have been influenced to support political agenda, in Australia sections of the MSM were influenced by a $250 million a year cut in broadcasting licence fees, the deal was via PM Rudd Labor around 2008/09 so the savings over the past decade are huge.
ABC was given extra general funding by Rudd Labor, additional funding to develop social media websites and then handed the federal government Asia Pacific broadcasting contract. A private sector tender was the best offer but ABC were chosen and provided with extra funding. And then consider the ABC Board appointments and the obvious not too much attention now paid to the ABC Charter.
I have read reports of well known international billionaires who have invested in media companies.
The propaganda machine has been well thought out.
40
Maybe well enough to fool some of the people some of the time.
10
It is all right if this post is too long and gets removed. Also many of the principles cited are from the US Supreme Court, but here it is —
We learned in college in the 1950s that, ideally, free speech allows, or should allow, expression of nearly every idea, no matter how preposterous or even hateful, subject to the airing of every opposing expression to keep the colloquium free and balanced, open and informative.
John Milton’s Areopagetica written the 17th Century still underpins the philosophy of the free expression and exchange of every idea. “Though all the winds of doctrine were let loose to play upon the earth, so Truth be in the field, we do injuriously, by licensing and prohibiting, to misdoubt her strength. Let her and Falsehood grapple; who ever knew Truth put to the worse, in a free and open encounter?” (Ironically, as the Commonwealth’s censor under Cromwell, Milton fell far short of that mark.)
Oliver Wendell Holmes set a broad definition of permitted speech in his dissent in United States v. Schwimmer (1928), 279 U.S. 644, 653:
“If there is any principle of the Constitution that more imperatively calls for attachment than any other it is the principle of free thought, not free thought for those who agree with us but freedom for the thought that we hate.”
Voltaire is credited with saying: “I do not approve of what you say but will defend to the death your right to say it.”
Limits on speech should be vanishingly remote. A familiar, often abused limit is against falsely crying “Fire!” in a crowded theater. Justice Louis Brandeis’s concurring opinion in Whitney v. California (1927) 274 U.S. 357, 377, sensibly restricted this limitation:
“… no danger flowing from speech can be deemed clear and present unless the incidence of the evil apprehended is so imminent that it may befall before there is opportunity for full discussion.” And pertinently: “If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence.”
“Only an emergency,” he said, “can justify repression.”
More remote than that limitation, there is only Karl Popper’s ultimate paradox of tolerance:
“Unlimited tolerance,” he feared, “must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant and [we] are not prepared to defend against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. As long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise.”
And here is his critical limit: “But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols.”: (Karl Popper, The open society and its enemies.)
End note: Justice Brandeis succinctly dismissed witch political hunts in Whitney with, “Men feared witches and burnt women. It is the function of speech to free men from the bondage of irrational fears.” (Page 376.)
91
Ultimately the only safeguard against fake news is free speech. In that case the listener must employ critical thinking skills. The alternatives to free speech would mean that misinformation, whether deliberate or accidental, would go unchallenged and correction unlikely. All we must do is look the history of times and places where free speech has been redistricted.
Warmists don’t like free speech because then they must prove their case over turning the null hypothesis. This they have never done. If their case was strong they would not fear free speech.
131
Oops, Should read: All we must do is look to the history of times and places where free speech has been restricted.
40
Free speech is good in theory. The trouble is that only one side of the argument is allowed to be heard. Try reading the Canberra times (or any Fairfax publication for that matter) and spot the fairness given to opposing viewpoints.
It isn’t there. Articles on global warming never give the opposite viewpoint. Political articles give 3/4 of the space to the leftist viewpoints, with the conservative viewpoint hidden in the middle where most people don’t read it.
They have given up on even the pretence of being unbiased.
11
If only 8% think the climate doesn’t change where’s the problem, no-one wants to ban flat-earthers from the internet surely?
His problem is that he is a climate change denial conspiracist™, he believes that a tiny percentage of CC™ denialists exercise such enormous persuasive power that for instance any questioning of the degree of human contribution to alleged CC™ must be silenced.
80
Ah, of course, all those ones funded by Big Oil. It doesn’t matter a jot nor a tittle that they’re all still waiting for their cheques and always will be, you just can’t let facts get in the way of a good piece of propaganda … 🙂
He’s so far off the wall, I sometimes wonder if he’s just having fun at the world’s expense.
“How outrageous can I be? What can I get away with and how many can I convince and still keep my job?”
</Take Twice Daily with a ton or two of salt>
90
His reasoning is built upon a misleading polling conclusion.
At the center of the AGW hypothesis, ironically, is that climate is essentially stable unless humans alter it. The underlining assumption of such polling, deceitfully, is that everyone who agrees that the climate changes, a little or a lot, agrees with that.
50
you know they’re running scared and getting desperate when they ramp up the censorship strategy. Too many people learning the facts about “climate change”. Can’t have that.
Stephan, to you I say crawl back into your hole. And remember mate, when the war is won we WILL be coming after you and your kind.
Legally, of course 😉
100
About time Yes Minister was brought back. Jim Hacker can be the Minister for the Ministry of Truth. The chief of the department of truth, Humphrey Appleby to be played by Stephan Lewandowsky.
20
Gods, NO. Humphrey Appleby is far and away more intellegent and way sharper and shrewder than that Lewandowsky!
Brian, perhaps?
00
Recently, on YouTube, I watched briefly a prominent psychologist expounding on the evils of advertising. The material was too familiar and the finger-wagging commentary too obvious so I went to turn him off. Then I noticed a clip of his about climate change and decided to check it out.
The clip, before I turned it off also, consisted of just the kind of tawdry spruiking our psychologist had been warning against in relation to tobacco and sugary drinks: images of Hurricane Hayan accompanied by dark music and extravagant claims in quotes on the screen.
This bloke, like Lew, is another a two-bob spruiker for the Holocene denial industry. But that’s okay. I just want to be free to point to facts and events which contradict that very expensive and unproductive industry. And, as with the publishing of the photo of the Mufti, I’m happy to confine myself to bare fact and event. The Holo-deniers can keep their advertising tricks.
81
Claims of “misinformation” are a bit rich from Stephen Lewandowsky. the lead author of a paper titled NASA faked the moon landing|Therefore (Climate) Science is a Hoax: An Anatomy of the Motivated Rejection of Science, based on am internet opinion survey. Only 10 of 1145 responses supported the Moon Hoax conspiracy theory. Of these only 3 also supported the “Climate Science is a hoax” conspiracy theory. Two of those we scam responses that also supported every other conspiracy theory. These 3 supporters of both conspiracies were not interviewed to see their reasoning.
41
I suppose there is a similarity between CAGW and Tobacco, – Tax !
51
Claims of “misinformation” as a bit rich from the statistical manipulations involved in making a decade-long stationary temperature trend in HADCRUT4 temperature data about like a greater rate of warming than in the 1990s. I replicated the result and called it the Lewandowsky Smooth.
72
The people with the weakest and most dogmatic arguments are often are the first proponents to think of reasons why their opponents are inferior. Stephan Lewandowsky did two surveys. The first is the notorious alarmist blog-based survey and the other an internet-based survey in the USA. He claimed that so-called climate deniers suffered from conspiracist ideation. Neither of the survey results backed up this contention. The US survey quite clearly shows quite clearly another, quite banal. conclusion. People with strong opinions in one area, whether for or against, tend to have strong opinions in other areas, whether for or against. Do the opposite of Stephen Lewandowsky and fellow climate alarmists practice and check the underlying data behind my claims for yourselves.
71
Nailed it Kevin. “They’ have a willing Trojan who cares not a jot (Connelly bless him) for where this narrative began, but where it ends. A cheap appeal to authority and willing accomplices in a monstrous lie. I’m really sad that no matter how much we learn, how far we progress we still have those who scale the most prodigious heights of academic achievement only to demean it all because of their bias and greed. I believe that is a charitable view, it may be worse. They may just be venal bastards.
BTW we here in NZ are having the most wonderful summer. Hot beach weather if ever you saw it. Av sea temps around us are way above av which I find very interesting because it seems to be a very local phenomenon. Interesting thing is, I look to my garden for weather clues, my lawn is saying spring. I was in Africa last Jan and I saw the same thing. Wet spring like conditions in January. Do I believe this is excess CO2 talking?, not a jot ‘(My man Connelly again…)
10
The fix is already in here in Australia. Yesterday I tried twice to add your electricity price post to an ABC Fakebook article on power prices, both times after a few minutes they were classed as Spam. My later comments about the censoring were noticed by readers.
I will keep trolling these sites with alternative view points despite this censorship. I don’t give up easily.
141
So the same article was changed to Spam on both GWPF and ABC shows that it is not just censored on one side of the argument, but both warmist and skeptic Fakebook posts. I will try again today.
60
I tried to post similar on The Conversation, only to find the “conversation” is rather one sided and pro-CC and my posting was deleted because apparently I “hadn’t played by the rules”….
I couldn’t find anything wrong with my posting by their own rules, but seem to confirm censorship is rampant in the empty headed Leftist echo chambers….
60
I’ve seen other reports that “The Conversation” is just an empty headed leftist echo chamber that won’t tolerate dissenting posts.
10
Good luck,
10
[…] could go wrong? Professor Stephan Lewandowsky, an expert in “misinformation” at Bristol University, said MPs […]
10
Green (=red) politicians, Green media, Green education and Green science. Sorry, but don’t think they can be stopped now.
61
Its been an unmitigated disaster, but I’m confident a serious change in the weather will bring about a revolution in thinking.
While we are waiting it might be useful to dream up a new scientific paradigm to replace the old AGW model.
We could also put together a Red Team, no more than half a dozen of the best minds we can muster, to explain how climate really changes.
Built into this paradigm shift is a laughing mechanism, which uses satire to soften the shock.
Victory is a certainty, just a matter of time.
40
That may be so EG but a lot of damage and bad times lie before us unless more of the sheeple come to their senses fairly rapidly.
20
Dank green fingers clawing deep in their pockets seems likely to get their attention, oh yes, and open borders. They’ll be free to walk to China for their next job. Eventually, the rest of the World will owe Australia a huge debt of gratitude for demonstrating the methods and results of the eco-Marxist nightmare … that is, if they’re smart enough. Sadly, New Zealand and Canada appear unlikely to be amongst these as they stride, open armed toward the globalist embrace.
00
Do you remember that once upon a time, ifsomeone was described as ‘green’ it was used in a pejorative sense, for someone a bit thick and slow?
Has anything changed? 😉
Actually, yes. They are now a danger to the whole human race and the environment.
Come, little red thumbers!
40
The Green Movement performed okay in the early days but was taken over by left wing radicals, which has altered the course of history.
21
Annie don’t despair. Greens only ever attract a few loonies and misfits. Where you need to be really concerned is if the national level of loonies and misfits rises, like here in New Zealand. Lucky country this. If this were an inhospitable desert with the same people living here, there would be internecine strife.
10
“Green” used to mean “inexperienced,” mostly. A “greenhorn” was a newbie.
10
24 Jan: ClimateChangeNews: Karl Mathiesen: ‘We have to change capitalism’ to beat climate change, says Blackrock vice-chair
Top brass at the world’s largest asset manager says the rules governing investments are evolving to factor in environmental risks
Two weeks ago, Blackrock boss Larry Fink shook the corporate world with a letter demanding social responsibility in return for the support of his company, which manages around $6 trillion in assets.
On Wednesday, at the annual World Economic Forum in Davos, vice-chair Philipp Hildebrand expanded on that theme.
Fiduciary duty – asset managers’ legal responsibility to make clients the best return on their money – is often deployed as a reason not to consider how investments might impact the climate. But that concept was “evolving”, said Hildebrand.
He called on academics to look more deeply at the issue.
The European Commission recently launched a public consultation (LINK) seeking for contributions from the financial world…
“We have to be realistic, we also have an enterprise to run, we have shareholders, this is a complicated story. Nobody is served by reducing this to very simple, fast things that we have to do immediately. We have to change capitalism. This is really what’s at stake here. And frankly we need a new contract between companies, investors and governments,” said Hildebrand.
Former US vice-president Al Gore, who was on the panel with the Blackrock executive, agreed that the field of research was still evolving. But said: “In 26 sectors of the economy, the vast majority of them, the companies that integrate ESG (environmental, social and governance) into their business plans perform better.”…
“For many years investors and asset managers have said ‘well I would like to invest with attention to these things, but my fiduciary duty to my clients keeps me from doing it’. The revolutionary change… is that now it may be becoming clear that if you do not integrate these factors into your investing, you’re violating your fiduciary responsibilities.”…
Last year, Blackrock hired Brian Deese, a former senior advisor to president Barack Obama, to head up its $195 billion Sustainable Investing group. Deese was a key advisor to the president on climate and part of the US team that negotiated the Paris climate accord…
http://www.climatechangenews.com/2018/01/24/change-capitalism-says-blackrock-vice-chair/
11
OT but I see ABC is still engaged in high quality investigative journalism at its finest !
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-25/camels-disqualified-from-beauty-contest-over-botox-injections/9360172
40
High quality, highly important news, as reported by our (‘their’) ABC.
Bread and circuses, anybody?
30
24 Jan: Daily Caller: Macron Lectures On Global Warming At Davos As France Misses Climate Targets
By Michael Bastasch
French President Emmanuel Macron made global warming a central part of his World Economic Forum speech on Wednesday in Davos, pledging to close all of his country’s coal-fired power plants by 2021.
Macron’s anti-coal pledge comes as Ecology Minister Nicolas Hulot announced France failed to meet its 2016 global warming target to limit greenhouse gas emissions to 447 million metric tons…
France gets 75 percent of its electricity from nuclear power plants, and only one percent comes from coal.
In fact, France only has three power plants that burn coal, so meeting Macron’s goal probably won’t be that hard. On the other hand, France relied on British coal plants to make up for offline nuclear capacity when temperatures dropped in November…
http://dailycaller.com/2018/01/24/macron-davos-france-global-warming/?print=1
23 Jan: TheLocalFrance: AFP: France fails to meet targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions
The environment ministry said the country emitted 463 tons of greenhouse gases, measured as carbon dioxide equivalents, or 3.6 percent more than its goal.
It attributed the slip in part to lower oil prices which can prompt people and businesses to consume more in areas such as transportation or heating.
24 Jan: ClimateChangeNews: Megan Darby: Macron’s climate charm offensive continues with Davos Trump jibe
The French president said he was thankful no-one “sceptical” had been invited to the World Economic Forum, while touting climate action as a “pillar” of his strategy
“With this snow, it could be hard to believe in global warming,” Macron joked. “Fortunately, we did not invite anybody sceptical this year.”…
In fact, US president Trump is due to address the forum on Friday…
Jokes aside, Macron described action on climate change as one of five “pillars” of his domestic agenda, arguing a clean transition was good for the economy…
“We have decided to make France a model in the fight against climate change,” he said…
France has some ground to make up after missing its 2016 emissions target by 3.6%. Ecology minister Nicolas Hulot is set to reveal policies in housing, transport and forestry at the end of the month, to bring the country’s performance in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement.
In her speech to the forum earlier in the day, German chancellor Angela Merkel made only passing mention of climate change, describing it as “a great danger”…
http://www.climatechangenews.com/2018/01/24/macrons-climate-charm-offensive-continues-davos-trump-jibe/
01
Well…France was on the way down anyway…..this will just accelerate it…
Mind you, the French have form for going bolshie, so it will be interesting to see how this goes.
10
Pat says “Macron described action on climate change as one of five “pillars” of his domestic agenda”
I suppose the term “five pillars” will resonate with a large number of recent immigrants.
10
SPOT THE FAKE NEWS:
24 Jan: CarbonBrief: Robert McSweeney: Analysis: The climate papers most featured in the media in 2017
Every day, dozens of scientific journals publish new climate change research that is shared across the world via the internet.
These journal papers make headlines in news articles and on blog pages, they pop up in Twitter timelines and on Facebook. But which ones make the biggest impression? Which have been shared and reported most widely?
Carbon Brief has compiled its annual list of the 25 most talked-about climate change-related papers of 2017. The infographic above shows which ones made it into the Top 10.
Our analysis is based on the data collected by Altmetric (LINK), which tracks and scores journal papers by the number of times they’re mentioned in online news articles and on social media platforms. (You can read more about how the Altmetric scoring system works in an earlier article.)(LINK)…
First place
The most widely reported and shared article related to climate change last year was actually a “Policy Forum” commentary in the journal Science. Published in mid-January, “The irreversible momentum of clean energy” was covered by 232 news articles and tweeted more than 9,000 times. Its overall Altmetric score of 7,872 means it is the highest ranked of any article published last year.
This is no surprise, perhaps, considering the author was Barack Obama, who, at the time, was still the US president. But as the article is a commentary, it does not make it into Carbon Brief’s leaderboard of research papers…
Instead, first place goes to, “Global warming and recurrent mass bleaching of corals”, a Nature paper published in March, with a score of 3,166…READ ALL
https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-the-climate-papers-most-featured-in-the-media-in-2017
01
“considering the author was Barack Obama” = Obama’s name was printed where the actual author’s name usually appears
10
Lung cancer was a rare disease prior to the popular use of cigarettes, the correlation is strong and highly suggestive of a direct cause.
Conversely the climate has been changing since the year dot and the GAT trend since the Industrial Revolution or mid-20th century (they keep shifting the goal posts) is nothing historically unusual or unexpected, particularly after the LIA.
Not surprisingly Lewandowsky’s tobacco smoking —> global warming parallel is logically fallacious, a false analogy.
73
Exactly.
40
They use the tobacco relationship for two reasons; they believe in conspiracies, and they want a RICO prosecution in the same vein.
It is beyond the likes of Lewandowsky to even hear that they might be wrong. Take manalive’s post above as an example; he believes 8% of Australians don’t believe in catastrophic anthropomorphic global warming, and therefor because Australia does nothing, these 8% must have an enormous effect on the other 92%. There is no connection. And besides, the poles I see show around 60% of Australians don’t believe in any catastrophic effects of warming, anthropomorphic or not.
He refuses to see reality.
52
24 Jan: BBC: Pope says serpent temptation in Bible ‘first fake news’
Pope Francis has denounced the “snake tactics” of those who spread fake news, saying the first case of misinformation is in the Bible when Eve is tempted by the serpent to eat the forbidden fruit.
The episode showed the “dire consequences” that fake news can have, the Pope warned in a document…
***It comes amid a debate on ways to contain the spread of fake news on social media platforms and how it may have influenced recent elections, including in the US in 2016…
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-42802295
BBC, what about the Pope including the ***traditional media?
24 Jan: Vatican News: Pope Francis releases 2018 World Communications Day message
In his message for the World Communications Day 2018, Pope Francis calls for a “journalism for peace” in response to the threat of fake news, which “thrives on the absence of healthy confrontation with other sources of information”.
Pope Francis on Wednesday released his message for World Communications Day, which is held annually on the Sunday before Pentecost, falling this year on 13 May 2018…
The Holy Father’s message is traditionally published in conjunction with January 24, feast of St. Francis de Sales, patron of journalists, to allow bishops’ conferences, diocesan offices and communications organizations sufficient time to prepare audiovisual and other materials for national and local celebrations…
Please find below the official English-language translation of the Pope’s message…
1. What is “fake” about fake news?
The term “fake news” has been the object of great discussion and debate. In general, it refers to the spreading of disinformation on line or in the ***traditional media…
2. How can we recognize fake news?
None of us can feel exempted from the duty of countering these falsehoods. This is no easy task, since disinformation is often based on deliberately evasive and subtly misleading rhetoric and at times the use of sophisticated psychological mechanisms…
http://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2018-01/pope-world-communications-day-message-2018-truth-journalism-fake.html
11
Hmmm….Reformation meet Pope…..now why was that again?
20
“saying the first case of misinformation is in the Bible when Eve is tempted by the serpent to eat the forbidden fruit.
The episode showed the “dire consequences” that fake news can have, the Pope warned in a document…”
I can see why this guy would see that as “dire consequences.” That story is about humans having a free will, and the various consequences that has. This Pope et al would obviously prefer people – serfs – who would not think or question but just stayed busy in whatever little garden he thought they deserved.
10
FakeNewsMSM loves the Pope today, because he fits their agenda:
The pope’s fake news guide couldn’t be more different from Trump’s
In Depth· Washington Post· 6h ago
The Pope’s message to Donald Trump on the unholy power of verbal violence
New York Daily News· 4h ago
Pope Francis sees origin of fake news in the snake’s lies in the Garden of Eden
Los Angeles Times· 4h ago
Pope Francis denounces ‘fake news,’ calls on journalists to ‘communicate the truth’
ABC America· 9h ago
Pope says fake news is satanic, condemns use in politics
Reuters· 10h ago
Pope Francis compares fake news to snake in Garden of Eden
The Guardian· 11h ago
Pope Denounces ‘Fake News,’ Compares It To ‘Crafty Serpent’ That Misled Eve
Newsweek· 10h ago
Pope: ‘Fake News’ Is Evil, Journalists Must Search for Truth
Bloomberg· 11h ago
Pope warns against ‘fake news’ and likens it to ‘crafty serpent’ in genesis
NBC News· 3h ago
Pope warns on fake news: ‘Trusting in falsehood can have dire consequences’
Politico· 8h ago
however, FakeNewsMSM usually sees the Pope quite differently:
24 Jan: New York Review of Books: The Guilty Soul of Pope Francis
by Ariel Dorfman
There were certain words that Chileans were hoping that Pope Francis would say during his three-day visit to our country last week…
In an op-ed I wrote for The New York Times that appeared just before the papal visit, I argued that, for Chileans, the way in which Francis handled this case would be a critical test of whether he could restore the prestige of the disgraced local Church, so wounded by these scandals, to the noble place it had held in public sympathy for decades because of its brave opposition to the military dictatorship of General Augusto Pinochet (1973–1990). Pope Francis failed that test…
It seems probable, then, that the pope saw in Barros a reflection of his own experience: someone who believes he has been falsely indicted, but is unable to clear his name, who feels he has been a target of malicious left-wing and anticlerical activists determined to stain the reputation of an innocent man…
Did the pope not understand that this was a chance to redeem himself for not having been a Good Samaritan in Argentina? Did he not realize that this was a unique opportunity to show the courage he lacked years ago? Instead, he has damaged his moral standing and weakened the impact of his vital messages about the threats to humanity of poverty, war, and ecological disaster.
May the God Francis believes in forgive him.
http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2018/01/24/the-guilty-soul-of-pope-francis/
31
What has the world done to deserve this communist pope? I’m tempted to use the term anti-christ (slap on the wrist Annie, naughty) as I am appalled by some of the utterances he makes. In my lifetime the only pope for whom I ever felt any respect was Benedict.
30
If Saint Malachy’s prophesy is correct, this is the last pope. The next man who takes up the position is the Beast. It may be indicative of the prophesy’s validity, or it might be just that this pope comes from a communist country and likes it that way.
40
I am rather sure this pope will be the False Prophet…speaks like a lamb but has horns of a beast…
Misleads the entire world into worshipping the anti-christ…..
Reckon it might be close…..
“11 And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon.
12 And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.
13 And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men,
14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live.”
( Rev 13:11-14 )
00
Well, he definitely is not a saint!
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/pope-francis-chile-sex-abuse-victims-slander-1.4494449
00
“FakeNewsMSM loves the Pope today, because he fits their agenda”
The irony here is too much. The purveyors of fake news are all cheering the Pope’s message that fake news is bad.
That said, it isn’t fake news when they’re all pushing the same selective stories. That is organized propaganda.
20
LEW’S LAW
http://www.shapingtomorrowsworld.org/lewandowskyDiscount1.html
We live in strange times. How fortunate we are to have Lew’s Law – “the future is certainly uncertain” – to guide us through the mess. But, dear reader, do not jump to conclusions. Remarkably, greater uncertainty about climate change apparently does not support “arguments that mitigation is unnecessary or too costly.” That would be heresy of the worst kind.
“Such arguments are flawed because, if anything, greater uncertainty about the future evolution of the climate should compel us to act with even greater urgency than if there were no (or less) uncertainty” (8 May, 2017).
How would we choose sensibly between alternative courses of action in such a world? The guiding principle, presumably, would not be truth or knowledge, but that the squeakiest wheel must get the oil; and they sure know how to squeak – and shriek – about “climate change”.
Reference: https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/doomed-planet/2017/12/climate-elfs-cheer-santer-pause/
30
Note 13 a of this tactical program for post modernists
who believe only in power or those who think their ends
justify the means.http://www.psywarrior.com/Goebbels.html
00
Heh. That reminds me of when the British Board of Film Censors was renamed the British Board of Film Classification back in the ’80s. It still does exactly the same thing, and in a previous age they were happy to admit that it was censorship. But not now. Ooh, no. No censorship here, squire, honest.
10
“…libraries in the Soviet Union were repeatedly purged of all books deemed “harmful”. … between 1930 and 1932, libraries lost sixty percent more of their stock that was already purged at least three times.”
Thought that I would add that the same thing appears to be already happening here. The several local public libraries that I attend have been “purging” their shelves of anything that might be considered “interesting” and focussing almost exclusively on the latest “best seller”, the latest Dan Brown / Game of Thrones novel, the latest bodice ripper for the girls. I am told by my local library that any book that hasn’t been borrowed in the last year or so goes on a list to be sold off by the Friends of the Library.
Yes, its a different type of purging but when one considers the prejudices of the librarians and their Friends, the shelves get cleared out just as effectively.
My local library used to have a whole book case devoted to Aboriginal culture with all the classics. Now – nothing. All gone.
30
Perhaps we need a list of books at our local libraries that we borrow once a year to keep them on the shelves. Anyone want to start that list? We could set up an “adopt a library” list too.
81
Great idea Jo , I’m putting forward “Green eggs and ham” because unlike all the CAGW guff it’s relevant and true .
01
http://dailycaller.com/2018/01/23/davos-scientists-snow-switzerland-world-economic-forum/
10
The irony burns.
10
Lewandowsky would approve this important “news.”
https://junkscience.com/2018/01/claim-sandwiches-cause-global-warming/
While not laughing I was thrilled to learn that there is such a thing as the British Sandwich Association.
Unfortunately, it sounds like eating sandwiches made of only bread is almost optimal for saving the planet. Optimal would apparently be without the bread. Bon appetite!
30
More on the fake news front.
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/01/24/the-problem-isnt-just-corruption-at-the-fbi-and-main-justice-its-also-the-media/
30
This will hit the latte sipping set .
Milk not frothing properly because of global warming .
http://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2018-01-25/why-your-cappuccino-is-looking-like-a-flat-white/9360200
20
While on the subject of the tobacco industry and Lewandowsky… I’ve read that “20,679 physicians find Luckies less irritating.”
20
That sounds like a consensus!
11
People who think they own the truth and that they should control the truth are the most dangerous people.
20
The truth comes in many guises, depending on your bias, but a casual straw poll suggests that the Denialati are in fact against hierarchical power.
‘In a new thesis in psychology, Kirsti Jylhä at Uppsala University has studied the psychology behind climate change denial. The results show that individuals who accept hierarchical power structures tend to a larger extent deny the problem. The papers in the thesis are published in the scientific journal Personality and Individual Differences.’
Science Daily
11
Hmmm, maybe I should watch Farenheit 451 again. Don’t think I have watched it since I was a child!
20
“points out that any professor calling people “climate deniers” and confusing tobacco with the planetary climate is not much of a scientist.”
Call a spade a spade – if someone denies evidence, then they are a denier.
As to the rest of the article, well a website that relies on fake news and distorting facts to trick it’s audience is always going to be pro-fake news. Without the fake news you would have nothing to work with.
03
Well you seem to be the denier when it comes to the ever changing Climate but I suppose that is due to ignorance on your part.
And if you think this site is offering fake new then I suggest you go elsewhere, you won’t be missed.
01
It looks like you did not read the headline on the article.
00
And how would you know what is fake news? You were too dumb to get into science at university, and you are gullible enough to believe the claims from a small group, most of whom were also unable to get into science, regarding their pet hypothesis which they have never been able to provide proof without faking the facts. And claiming the “the science is settled” illustrates their ignorance of science.
No Harry, I don’t believe in the Boogeyman under the bed and nothing you say would convince me. You have nothing to justify your arrogance, you are an ignorant fool. You are the peddlar of Fake News.
If you cannot understand that, then Practice what you Preach take your comments to those dwindling sites where no dissenting comments are allowed and you are among others of your ilk.
21
Subject change, but I will roll. I was hoping that someone would spot the irony in the article I was referring to.
You might want to look up “ad hominem” in Wikipedia or somewhere before you comment any more.
Well Graeme, point me at some of your scientific publications and I promise to at least read the abstracts. You seem to be implying you have a good understanding of the scientific method, and know where all the climate scientists are going wrong. So the proof of your pudding is in your publications.
10
Harry there is no point hiding down here, come to the new open fred and we can have a chat.
By the way, I’m a card carrying member of the Denialati and proud.
11
“new open fred” ?
00
Twotter,
I don’t want to be called a denier. So please provide us with the evidence that supports the climate theory? Can’t provide it? Does that make you a twit? In Australia we often call people who make loud claims but can never back it up with action or evidence as being full of piss and wind. Is that your problem Harry?
11
Changing the subject, but I will roll with it. My point is if someone denies evidence, then they are a denier. The label is concise and to the point.
Can you be specific about what evidence you are interested in? I assume you have looked at the latest NASA/NOAA report for annual 2017 at least. And the IPCC AR5 report, although it is getting a little dated now.
Other than that, your question is like asking someone to demonstrate smoking increases the risk of lung cancer – where to begin?
01
Evidence that human emissions of CO2 cause catastrophic climate change? Simple question. Provide the specific evidence? You show that you know little to nothing about scientific research. Numerous studies have been completed on smoking populations compared to non-smoking populations. Smokers show increased rates of lung cancer compared to non-smokers. And the more the smokers smoke, the more lung cancer and other diseases they get compared to non-smokers. Classic dose-response evidence. You can’t show ANY of that for CO2 let alone human-emitted CO2, can you? Time to go to the toilet to relieve yourself of some of that piss and wind, Twotter?
01
“Evidence that human emissions of CO2 cause catastrophic climate change?”
You just changed the subject again!
Peter, the Artful Dodger!
00