The latest travesty in ‘consensus enforcement’

Posted: August 15, 2019 by oldbrew in climate, Critique

Judith Curry writes: ‘This ranks as the worst paper I have ever seen published in a reputable journal’, calls out Nature for ‘rank stupidity’ and puts forward this query: ‘The ignorance of climate change of AOC and Greta is rather shocking. Why isn’t anyone concerned about this?’

Climate Etc.

The latest travesty in consensus ‘enforcement’, published by Nature.

View original post 1,192 more words

  1. […] über The latest travesty in ‚consensus enforcement‘ — Tallbloke’s Talkshop […]

  2. oldbrew says:

    Shades of McCarthyism :/
    – – –

  3. cognog2 says:

    This article in Nature is little more than naked politics dressed up as purported science riddled with false assumptions and disreputable manipulation of statistics.
    It is akin to the 97% Meme – total BS.
    Do, however, prefer “Contrarian” to that nasty “Denier” label.with its connotations with the Holocaust..

  4. stpaulchuck says:

    “and media outlets accountable for their roles in the climate-change-denialism movement”

    first off – the strawman phrase “climate-change-denialism”. What a bunch of BS that is. No one I’ve read denies the climate changes. We’ve all seen this bit of stupidity bandied about on the LSM by the talking heads and put in print in so many LSM outlets. But then today’s “journalists” are about as bright as the proverbial box of rocks.

    Secondly, I did not see one evidence of incorrect information or bad science presented related to the “denialists” (as usual). Nature has become nothing more than an agitprop screed for libs and greenies. Too bad. It used to be a decent magazine.

  5. JB says:

    Judith needs to read Hannah Arendt and James Billington. Totalitarian regimes suppress dissent. Ultimately it is carried out with blood and terror until no dissent is to be found.

    Like most folks, we’re not anyone, we’re the someones who are concerned, but have few resources to make it known. Frequently such attempts at dissent gaining visibility are infiltrated, such as The Shed movement in Australia, for the purpose of eating out the core impetus until it collapses in chaos. Ironically, democratic societies are rich, fertile soil in which suppression of dissent thrives like weeds.

  6. hunterson7 says:

    Dr. Curry sums up this excercise in despotism quite well:
    “Climate science is a very broad and diffuse science, encompassing many subfields. Each of these subfields is associated with substantial uncertainties, and when you integrate all these fields and attempt to project into the future, there are massive uncertainties and unknowns. There are a spectrum of perspectives, especially at the knowledge frontiers. Trying to silence or delegitimize any of these voices is very bad for science.”

  7. ivan says:

    Most of the problem can be solved by disbanding the UN and all of its tentacles considering they are behind all of this global warming/climate change/climate emergency/or what ever the buzz word is this week. Just read their One World Government Manifesto as set out in Agenda 21 and expanded in Agenda 30

  8. Good article by Dr Curry. I am to insignificant to be on but no one has proved me wrong about methane not being an important greenhouse gas.
    I note that all the supposed “real” scientists in fact have no qualifications to make an assessment of climate. None understand the engineering subjects of Thermodynamics, Heat and Mass transfer, Fluid Dynamics, Reaction kinetics or even Psychrometry.

  9. Sorry about spelling and leaving out words. I meant to put “too insignificant to be on a list of contrarians. However, you can find me on the list of Saltbush members (who support Clexit) which includes many of the listed contrarians plus many more not listed.

  10. Dr Curry’s blog post included a link to the paper’s list of 386 “contrarians” ( ). I dumped the list into a simple spreadsheet, and Dr Curry is at the #4 spot on the list. Our own Roger “Tallbloke” Tattersall is #282 on the list. And li’l ol’ me (likely a result of Desmog having its own profile hit — / — of me at their place) is at the #131 spot on the “contrarian” list.

    If they are using ME as some kind of indicator of “contrarians” breaking through to the public to disseminate at length about pure climate science, it shows you just how worthless the paper actually is on proving the conclusion that AGW scientists get less media coverage than “contrarians.”

  11. wert says:

    I’m seldom agreeing with oldbrew so much, but now I am. Dr. Curry is right about this paper being a ridiculous hit piece, to paraphrase bluntly. They mix up celebrities, non catastrophist scientists, journalists etc and put together a general blacklist of people. The paper should be withdrawn for unethical conduct. Seriously, this is nothing but slander and really really awful mistakes.

  12. oldbrew says:

    Anthony Watts is threatening legal action over this, with others.

    Nature is considering the complaints.

  13. Gamecock says:

    “Nature is considering the complaints.”

    But not doing any soul searching.

    Not asking, “How the heck did we get here?”

  14. oldbrew says:

    Date: 18/08/19 Susan Crockford, Polar Bear Science

    The clear intention of this paper is to try and put an even tighter lid on the scientific literature and mainstream media so that any individuals with views that run counter to a message-of-climate-doom are excluded.

    Along with hundreds of other people – 385 to be exact – I have been blacklisted [#181] by the science journal Nature Communications in a recently-published abysmal paper by three authors from University of California Merced, after I and a number of others were publicly defamed by a squadron of authors in a similarly-stupid paper less than two years ago in the general interest journal BioScience. This obsession that scientists-with-a-message have about silencing peers with other viewpoints (rather than constructing and communicating a winning argument themselves) is vile and utterly counter to what real science is about. Not surprisingly, they positively fawn over media stars like Al Gore and Greta Thunberg who have no science background but willingly repeat the accepted message of climate-change-doom.

  15. oldbrew says:

    Monckton has cranked up the legal pressure on the university and Nature.

    By this letter I give notice that, subject to anything you may say within the next seven days, I propose to report you for fraud to the prosecuting authorities in the United Kingdom, where your press release has been widely circulated, in the United States, where you perpetrated your fraud, and internationally to Interpol.

    Viscount Monckton of Brenchley

    It’s getting ugly 😎
    – – –
    US Vice President Mike Pence is on the list (no. 35)

  16. oldbrew says:

    Blacklisting climate skeptics will not work
    By David Wojick | August 19th, 2019

    Mainstream media is already top heavy with alarmism. They could stop mentioning skepticism entirely and it would not matter, because skeptics own the blogosphere. This is the populist power of the Internet. We no longer depend on left wing mainstream media for information, more for laughs.
    When it comes to the climate change debate, biased mainstream media is no longer significant.