Climate scare never about honest science reporting 

Posted: March 1, 2019 by oldbrew in Accountability, alarmism, climate, IPCC, media, opinion, propaganda
Tags: ,


The climate propaganda game goes on daily, ignoring any inconvenient realities.

The media communicates transparently false and provocatively sensationalized climate claims without vetting them, accuses Larry Bell @ CFACT.

Numbers of my exceedingly well-informed friends — including highly distinguished current and former faculty at prominent universities — lament transparently false and provocatively sensationalized climate-related media claims.

They wonder, for example, why major print and broadcast reports fail to note that, other than two El Niños (which have nothing whatsoever to do with greenhouse gases), no statistically significant global warming has occurred since the time most of today’s college sophomore students were born.

Regarding ballyhooed melting of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, shouldn’t more journalists report a well-known cause that this expanse is situated directly above a chain of active seabed volcanoes?

Why don’t more “scientific” articles highlight that even if this floating attachment breaks off into the sea, it won’t raise ocean levels, just as melting ice cubes won’t change the liquid level in a glass? (Try it.)

Incidentally, the continent of Antarctica has actually been gaining net ice mass.

And what about breathless “news” coverage of Al Gore’s 2008 warning that the North polar ice cap would be gone in five years? Wouldn’t you expect to see at least a small update notation that satellites show that winter Arctic sea ice is now growing faster than occurred decades ago?

Shouldn’t the mainstream media want you to know that the constant sea level rise of about 7 inches per century hasn’t accelerated a bit since the little ice age ended through entirely natural causes in the mid-1800s? And wouldn’t it be appropriately comforting to inform caring souls that those “threatened” polar bear populations they had previously reported are actually growing and thriving?

With all the constant trumpeting about human-caused climate change (both warmer and colder) causing “extreme weather” events to become more frequent and severe, shouldn’t there be at least a tiny toot regarding true history? Like maybe an occasional passing reference to the fact that no Category 3-5 hurricanes have struck the U.S. coast since October 2005, setting a more than century-long record lull?


Perhaps it might even be whispered that NOAA and the IPCC have both admitted that there have been no increases in the severities or frequencies of droughts, floods, thunderstorms, or tornadoes in decades.

My theory on all this, admittedly being merely a rocket scientist, is that perhaps the reporters and their sources really don’t want you to know facts that don’t fit their narrative agendas.

But don’t take my word for this. Let’s hear directly from some experts with the real inside scoop.

Continued here.

Comments
  1. dai davies says:

    Sceptics nit-pick about poor practices and biased media with still conceding a role for the GHE. As long as that continues people and governments will feel the need to continue expansion of renewables as inevitable.
    The foundations of the GHE have to be attacked. It was always an assumption and now shown to be an unsupportable one.
    http://brindabella.id.au?c=RDC for details of new science
    http://brindabella.id.au?c=EAR for a broad overview

  2. Richard111 says:

    When people ask me why I am a sceptic I offer this simple explanation.

    Engineers use cooling fins on machines that run too hot.

    You can test the effectiveness of a cooling fin by obtaining a small block
    of mild steel and a thin plate of mild steel of exactly the same weight (mass).

    Heat both to a fairly high temperature and then expose them to the air.

    See which one you can pick up first with your bare hand. All agree without
    doing the test that the thin plate will cool before the block.

    I explain this is because of the number of surface molecules in contact
    with the air on the plate is much greater than those on the block.

    I then suggest they imagine the this plate is only one molecule thick.
    How fast the cooling then?

    The smart ones ask how can you heat the molecules? the explanation for
    that involves some science that is being seriously misused by warmists
    but to long to explain in a comment.

    Basically, radiative gas molecules in the atmosphere cannot trap heat.

  3. Damian says:

    I have been watching a series about scientology and there is a great similarity between the way climate science smears “deniers” and the way scientology smears apostates.
    If you read the desmog blog, for example, this reads like scientology propaganda.
    It is uncanny.

  4. ivan says:

    Damian, your observation is why a lot of us refer to it as the UN Church of Climatology because it is a cult. If it looks like a cult, acts like a cult and speaks like a cult it most probably is a cult.

  5. stpaulchuck says:

    I’ve come to the conclusion that AGW is a religion. I’ve presented links to a number of really great papers of actual science that rebuff the CO2 nonsense, along with graphs and charts to those bleating the warmist line, all to no avail. They won’t take the papers as either true or ‘real’ science. When you bring up the thriving polar bears they just huff off with a throwaway line about ‘science denier’ or other.

    A great part of this is due to the herd mentality of a large part of the population. They are terrified of getting cut out of the herd so whatever the herd believes in they go with. Take a look at the many videos of interviews on college campuses where these young people are asked to either define something like socialism or to cite instances of accusations against certain public figures. They stammer and go blank (for the most part) or outright lie. They know nothing about whatever the subject but moo along because it’s what the herd believes.

    AGW and the (non existent) greenhouse effect (GHE) are crusades like ‘save the whales’ and a hundred others that are tossed to the curb after a while. This one lasts longer because the pols have been using it to take more money and power from the people and put it in their pockets and those of their friends (UN agenda 21).

  6. oldbrew says:

    U.S. DEMOCRATS RAISE ALARM OVER PROPOSED WHITE HOUSE CLIMATE SCRUTINY PANEL
    Date: 02/03/19 The Hill

    A group of liberal lawmakers in both the House and Senate are raising concerns over a new climate council being organized at the White House that includes members who question the science behind global warming [alarmism].

    https://www.thegwpf.com/u-s-democrats-raise-alarm-over-proposed-white-house-climate-scrutiny-panel/

    Scaremongers getting scared?

  7. Gamecock says:

    By the late 80s, the pinko communists in the press had failed to achieve the cultural hegemony necessary to implement communism in the U.S. Along comes James Hansen telling the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources that Man was warming the atmosphere. Dangerously.

    The press and other leftists SEIZED the opportunity to create an environment suitable for the acceptance of communism. Not an environment suitable for Man. The movement, driven by the press, not science, was always about getting the people to accept communism. The press and other leftists COULD NOT CARE LESS ABOUT THE SCIENCE.

    When MMGW is no longer usable by the Left for their agenda, it will be tossed away. As if it never happened. And Nat Geo Magazine will never apologize for 25 years of ascribing all natural occurrences to global warming. This doesn’t mean the Left will go away. Far from it. It just means they’ll bring up other memes to convince you to accept communism.

    Like ocean acidification.

    Like sea level rise.

    It will never end. As long as freedom and liberty exist, the Left will be fighting it.

    Meteorological science is interesting. We have been learning some interesting things about long term variability and changes. But the doomsday shit corrupts it all. “Climate science” is bogus and vile. It allowed itself to be corrupted for fame and money. They have been selling the rope with which to hang us.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s