Repeating climate denial claims makes them seem more credible

By Jo Nova

A group of arty psychologists has accidentally shown how much skeptics can achieve if they just speak up.

The small, poorly worded study, done by people who have little understanding of the climate debate, or even of the scientific method, doesn’t prove much at all. But if you start with 170 people who have been fed propaganda for years and then ask some random questions, whatever you repeat seems more believable. We could have learnt so much more if these psychologists did not start so confused themselves.

Their big “discovery” was that hearing something skeptical a second time gave it a significant boost in believability, even when the audience were 90% believers. Their big conclusion was the advice to essentially never utter a skeptical word, just repeat the propaganda:

“Do not repeat false information. Instead, repeat what is true and enhance its familiarity.”

They appear to be oblivious that their advice essentially kills the idea of open public debate. They don’t mention public debate or free speech. Possibly, since they are at an Australian university, they’ve never come across it.

But the core message comes through at The Guardian — they are scared skeptics […]

How Deep is that Swamp? Science papers silenced. Even the former head of MI-6 was pressured to stay silent

Even the former Head of MI-6 was warned to say nothing about the origins of Covid. The Swamp is so deep, and the corruption or infiltration of the West is so complete, that even at the highest levels in both government advice and in science, people were being censored.

Notice how the collectivists have changed the meaning of the word “conspiracy”. How do we discuss “a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful.” when even the word we most want to use is now used as a namecalling label, the implies the user is delusional. The derision is now automatically assumed. Who does that serve?

Even Sharri Markson uses the term “conspiracy” with the new definition.

Our language is being destroyed. Gradually key words are weaponised against free thinkers.

….

The paper by Piplani et al (including Professor Petrosky) that was repeatedly rejected without the paper even being looked at. The authors expected a very different response when they submitted it. Normally, this kind of topical controversial paper would have been accepted quickly by journals wanting to grab the limelight and headlines.

It was eventually published in Nature in 2021. The paper showed that SARS-2 […]