The new ‘climate denial’

Posted: February 11, 2017 by oldbrew in climate, ideology, opinion

In a world of soundbites a two-word label is about the limit before people mentally switch off.

Climate Etc.

by Judith Curry

Interesting article in The Atlantic, but I’m still trying to figure out what is being ‘denied.’

View original post 1,032 more words

  1. oldbrew says:

    Note: commenters using the ‘d word’ may find WordPress software flags the comment for moderation. That’s just how it is.

  2. pg sharrow says:

    I’ve always found Judith to be a warmer, just not a crazy one. The only human caused global warming, by humans that I have seen proved, is data manipulation. The concept of CO2 causing increases in global atmospheric temperature has been proved to be false. The climate is always changing and human activities are not a real factor. And last, the argument that humans are the cause of climate change has been used for political purposes for thousands of years. Does that make me one of those “D” word people?

    I would certainly hope so…pg

  3. 8364kHz says:

    A reply from my M.P. (Skipton and Ripon) to my question concerning the spiralling costs, I pointed out that there is no evidence of mankind’s influence on a changing climate.

    “I agree with you that some areas of climate change science need further research, but I do believe that man-made climate change is one of the most serious global challenges we face.”


    “Regardless of ones views on climate change, decarbonising the UK’s energy supplies will reduce the exposure of our energy prices to movements in international fossil fuel prices.”

    This chap has been told ‘what to think’, not ‘how to think’.


  4. catweazle666 says:

    8364kHz: yes, you’re wasting your time on Julian Smith.

    A slavish follower of the party line, unfortunately.

  5. oldbrew says:

    ‘will reduce the exposure of our energy prices to movements in international fossil fuel prices.’

    So if we pay high prices [for part-time renewables] we’ll be less exposed to changes in lower prices [for non-renewables]. What fool would run a business on that basis?

  6. A C Osborn says:

    Oldbrew, that is the whole point, none of them could run a business, that is why they are MPs.

  7. Paul Vaughan says:

    US infighting is undermining US integrity.
    There are no brakes on the runaway train.
    Solution from outside the US is the only stable option.

    Judith Curry’s dark lukewarm corruption has gone totally black.
    Her tone has descended to that of a closed minded abusive dictator who is going to use a baseball bat to repeatedly beat you silly until you take a lukewarm position.

    Get this clown off the stage.

  8. tom0mason says:

    Looked at Judith Curry site and left a comment —

    What the unproven hypothesis of CO2 warming the atmosphere is nothing compared to what humans have done in other areas to affect the climate.
    Draining of the Aral Sea, and the diversion of natural water courses, have far greater effects than the nonsense blathered on about with CO2 by intelligent people who should know better.
    In 600 million years there is no evidence that CO2 caused any global warming, even when CO2 levels where above 6,000ppm there were still ice ages and when CO2 was as low or less than now the earth was warmer.

    CO2 causes runaway global warming is piffle, a myth!

    I can not imagine anyone will take any notice but there it is, this AGW boondoggle has legs yet.

  9. oldbrew says:

    Discussion: JC’s ‘role’
    Posted on February 11, 2017
    by Judith Curry

    In view of recent controversies, numerous criticisms have been made about my ‘role,’ with expectations of things that I ‘should’ be doing.

    JC concludes: I don’t have an agenda for influencing policy, largely because I have no particular wisdom or political preference related to energy and climate policy, beyond the obvious peace, health and prosperity for everyone.
    – – –
    Of course there’s no ‘neutral corner’ in the so-called climate debate, having stepped into the ring.

  10. Climatism says:

    “In a world of soundbites a two-word label is about the limit before people mentally switch off.”
    Quote of the year thus far.

  11. oldbrew says:

    Climate activists’ final act, as they move into the last stage of grief

    Not sure about that, we shall see.

  12. dai davies says:

    If, as it seems, the consensus is regrouping around a luke-warmist position, the line in the sand becomes, ‘Does my position justify decarbonisation?’

    The economic, social, and political consequences of the Decarb movement – denying cheap and reliable energy to billions of people and providing a pretext for global control – are as bad as the extreme consequences heralded for warming.

    Compromising and taking a middle position is not always a rational approach. It depends on the context and how you define ‘middle’. I’m reminded of the joke about a family who couldn’t agree on whether to take their holidays in Western Australia or South America, and ending up snow-bound in a hut in Antarctica.

  13. Paul Vaughan says:

    Stable division’s superior to unstable union.

  14. pochas94 says:

    Arctic winter warming, if it exists, is wholly beneficial to humans, animals, plants, everything. Draconian measures to stop it are foolhardy, especially since past climate history says a cold spell is probably in store. As in California, what we now fear is probably the opposite of what will actually happen.