Archive for the ‘Psychobabble’ Category

Image credit: consumerreports.org


Anyone can ‘demand action’ but what is being demanded? A quick look at some logistics: every wind turbine uses a lot of energy-intensive concrete and steel in its manufacture. Both turbines and solar panels require industrial-scale mining of rare earth materials, plus coal-burning for steel. Unthinkably vast quantities of both wind and solar at enormous expense would be needed to make even a modest dent in the dominance of coal, oil and gas in world energy consumption. The assumed benefit to the climate is debatable to say the least. Where is the sanity in all this?

For years, Black Friday has been sold as a holiday day for the consumer, says TIME (via Yahoo News).

In 2018, Black Friday resulted in $6.22 billion in online sales alone, per CNBC. This year, climate activists wants people to stop and reconsider such rampant consumption.

(more…)


This is fun if you’re not one of the climate botherers claiming we’re all doomed. If so you’re probably in the “well-educated conservative white men” group, says Phys.org.

In the melting Arctic, communities are racing to maintain their way of life. In the rising Pacific, residents are sounding alarm bells.

And in Rhode Island, Kate Schapira and her husband are not having a baby.

Fears about climate change are prompting worldwide action, but one knock-on effect in the United States is mounting anxiety about everything from plastics to class-based environmental disparities.

(more…)


Well, that wasn’t quite the original GWPF headline – but close enough 😎
We’re about to receive yet another media tsunami of alarmist babble, it seems. All that and a ‘Brexit election’ too for our long-suffering UK readers.

* More than 200 media outlets and journalists partnered together with activists to coordinate and hype climate change news before the 2019 U.N. climate summit.

* Two of the largest media outlets — BuzzFeed News and HuffPo — did not disclose their role in the project to their readers, a Daily Caller News Foundation review found.

* The project raises questions about whether journalists should work side-by-side with activists to hype climate change.

Over 250 news outlets and journalists partnered with Columbia University School of Journalism’s flagship magazine to shape control of “climate crisis” coverage in the lead up to the United Nations climate conference.

(more…)


So, a meeting of some of the world’s top climate experts? Not quite – more like a jet-set summerfest, but hosted by an internet tech giant. What was that about ‘carbon footprints’?

The Duke of Sussex gave an impassioned speech on the environment to an elite audience of business leaders and celebrities gathered at Google’s top-secret annual retreat in Sicily, reports the Evening Standard.

Prince Harry is understood to have insisted climate change is a humanitarian issue, not a political one as he gave the address – while reportedly barefoot.

Leonardo DiCaprio and Naomi Campbell are understood to have been among the crowd of VIPS and and power-brokers at the summer conference dubbed ‘Davos-on-Sea’ with Katy Perry, Harry Styles, Karlie Kloss and Bradley Cooper also said to have been on the confidential guest list.

Chris Martin gave a performance at night amid the brightly-lit ruins.

(more…)

.
.
Climate nonsense on stilts has gone way too far. Time to kick the stilts away.

Science Matters

Recently published in Nature is a comment article Why setting a climate deadline is dangerous by
Shinichiro Asayama, Rob Bellamy, Oliver Geden, Warren Pearce & Mike Hulme.

H/T Robert Walker, who explains in his post at Science 2.0 Should IPCC Openly Challenge ‘Only 12 Years To Save Planet’ Deadline Rhetoric? Excerpts in italics with my bolds.

Ever since the IPCC report in 2018, there’s been an increasing surge of doomist reporting, to the point that it is no surprise that there are many of our youngsters are naturally depressed and suicidal, thinking there is little point in life, and that they won’t live to be adults. Others are leading the way with politically unrealistic demands that we decarbonize completely within 12 years. These new requirements they are making are not supported at all by science, rather they are a result of emotional rhetoric, journalistic exaggerations, and junk science

View original post 415 more words


The climate apocalypse bandwagon first got going nearly as long ago as the first moon landing, but shows no signs of falling apart despite a dismal record of no-show of its forecasts, as Climate Change Dispatch explains. The urge to blame humans for any and all vagaries, real or imagined, of the climate seems deep-rooted despite this ongoing lack of predictive success.

This month, The Wall Street Journal celebrated its 130th anniversary by republishing salient articles spanning that period, including this retrospectively illuminating report from February 2, 1978:

A climatic disaster, triggered by the continued burning of oil and coal, could result in the submergence of much of Florida, Holland and other low-lying areas in the next 50 years, an Ohio State University scientist predicted… “I contend that a major disaster – a rapid five-meter rise in sea level caused by deglaciation of West Antarctica – may be imminent or in progress, after atmospheric carbon dioxide has only doubled,” John H. Mercer, a glacier geologist, asserted.

By some miracle, fortunately, Florida and Holland were still with us over a decade later.

(more…)

Image credit: thebulletin.org


H/T The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)

Broadly speaking, two separate arguments bear the climate label. One is whether there is something wrong (whatever that may mean) with the climate, and the other is whether humans are causing changes to the climate. Of course the two are usually run together as one issue, or supposed issue. Here Canadian Professor Ross McKitrick looks at the first aspect, advising readers to ‘Clip out this column, keep it close at hand, and quote from the experts when the occasion arises.’ But most people find themselves exhorted to panic first and ignore all the underlying realities, despite the lack of anything worth panicking about.
– – –
On June 7, I published an op-ed on this page telling the story of Roger Pielke Jr., a U.S. climate expert whose research on climate change and extreme weather didn’t support many of the alarmist slogans on the subject.

Despite his findings being squarely in the mainstream of his academic specialty, for stating them publicly Pielke Jr. was vilified, bullied and eventually harassed into quitting the field.

Conservative MP Lisa Raitt tweeted a link to my article. As if to prove the point of the story, the climate mob quickly vilified, bullied and harassed her into deleting her tweet.

I wrote Lisa an open letter, hoping she would notice the pattern.

(more…)

Insects?


This is too silly for words of course, and we only post it to show how far climate brainwashers are willing to go to promote their phoney aganda. The story was featured on BBC radio’s morning news.

A pet food manufacturer says switching to a dog food made of soldier flies will protect the environment, as BBC News reports.

Do you fret that your pet pooch is blamed by environmentalists for turning rainforests into poo in the park?

Have no fear – you can now fatten Fido on black soldier flies instead of Brazilian beef.

(more…)


Take your time, plenty to choose from. Either enter the comp or tell us here on the blog – or both.

An international competition for our readers, friends and supporters, says The GWPF.

We at the Global Warming Policy Forum like to keep a close eye on what the press and the broadcast media have to say about global warming science.

Some of it is, it’s fair to say, pretty far removed from anything a reasonable person would recognise as, well, science.

(more…)

The Great Cnuts of Climate

Posted: October 29, 2017 by oldbrew in alarmism, climate, Critique, humour, Idiots, Psychobabble
Tags:

.
.
Another one in the eye for the tedious prophets of man-made climate doom.

MalagaBay

According to the history books Cnut the Great became King of England in 1016 AD.

Cnut the Great (c. 995 – 1035), also known as Canute – whose father was Sweyn Forkbeard (which gave him the patronym Sweynsson, Old Norse: Sveinsson) – was King of Denmark, England and Norway; together often referred to as the North Sea Empire.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cnut_the_Great

Cnut the Great is famously remembered for knowing he had no control over the elements.

The story of King Canute and the tide is an apocryphal anecdote illustrating the piety or humility of King Canute the Great, recorded in the 12th century by Henry of Huntingdon.

In the story, Canute demonstrates to his flattering courtiers that he has no control over the elements (the incoming tide), explaining that secular power is vain compared to the supreme power of God.

The episode is frequently alluded to in contexts where the futility of…

View original post 714 more words

.
.
Climate miserablists – look away now.

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

h/t Jo Nova

If only Yes Minister had done global warming. Well, it has now, in the new stage version.

It’s hilarious, absolutely to the point, and a must watch.

Yes Prime Minister Global Warming etc Part 1 from Aris Motas on Vimeo.

Yes Prime Minister Global Warming etc Part 2 from Aris Motas on Vimeo.

View original post

.
.
The climate alarm industry could be heading into a recession next year – unlike the polar bears they’re so fond of wailing about.

polarbearscience

If 10 years of summer sea ice levels expected to kill 2/3 of the world’s polar bears by 2050 hasn’t had an impact, why would anyone expect a bit less summer icewill do the job?

sea-ice-prediction-vs-reality-2012_polarbearscience

The more the polar bears fail to die in droves, the shriller the message from activist polar bear researchers – via willing media megaphones – that the great death of the bears will soon be upon us, just you wait and see!

Some big media guns were out this past week spreading the prophesy of doom fed to them by the polar bear researchers most committed to the “threatened with extinction” narrative: The New York Times, The Atlantic, The Guardian. The desperation is becoming palpable as the public catches on to their epic failure.

In 2007, the sea ice dropped to a level the experts said wouldn’t be reached…

View original post 1,450 more words

.
.
While BBC viewers in their TV bubble sit by the fireside grieving about the plight of those ‘poor polar bears’ (or similar emotive words)…in the real world it’s a different story altogether.

polarbearscience

The simple fact is that if polar bear experts had been right about the threat to polar bears from the loss of summer sea ice in the Arctic, there would be no polar bears in Churchill this fall. No bears for tourists to photograph, none for biologists to study, and certainly none for the BBC to film for an upcoming three-part TV special called “Arctic Live.

polar-bear-stock-image-gg66298544_smThe low-ice future that biologists said would doom polar bears to extinction by 2050 has already happened in 8 out of the last 10 years. The sea ice future has been realized.

Polar bears have experienced those supposedly deadly low-ice summers for almost a decade but the global population did not drop by 2/3 as predicted and not a single one of the ten subpopulations predicted to be extirpated under those conditions has been wiped out.

How much more wrong can you…

View original post 1,176 more words

.
.
Yet another polar bear alarm bites the dust.

polarbearscience

All the hubris last month about polar bear x grizzly hybrids, based on an unusual-looking bear killed near Arviat, has turned out to be wishful thinking by those who’d like to blame everything to do with polar bears on climate change. An awful lot of “experts” now have egg on their faces. That “hybrid” was just a blonde grizzly, as I warned it might.

grizzly-polar-bear-hybrid_Arviat 2016 Didji Ishalook

According to one report,Nunavut wildlife manager Mathieu Dumond said:

“Some otherwise pretty renown bear biologists jumped on the hybrid bear story without even knowing what they were talking about,” Dumond said.

“I think it was something blown out of proportion, with the wrong information to start.”

Gee, ya think? CBC ran a story too. But the CBC don’t really admit (see below) that they were the first out of the gate on this story and started the media madness. It was the CBC that relied…

View original post 695 more words

stivers-3-28-04-confidenceThe FUD campaign by Cameron and the Remainians continues. By getting big cheeses from the international stage to talk down Britain’s prospects outside the EU, they hope to undermine the British people’s confidence in their own ability to succeed in the wider world.

The mainstream media operates a complimentary tactic. Ignore or belittle the efforts of ‘the little people’ to make a positive difference to the ‘public’ debate. Downplay their popular movements, disparage their spokesmen and women. Deny them the oxygen of publicity. We’ve seen it all before in the climate wars. Now we’re getting the same thing again in spades with the EU referendum.

Between them, the establishment politicians and the mainstream media are trying to make us believe we can’t succeed with a brexit plan they and their paymasters disapprove of as being against their lobbying interests. They don’t believe in Britain any more, but they do believe in protecting their own financial interests.

From Science Daily

When it comes to forming opinions and making judgments on hot political issues, partisans of both parties don’t let facts get in the way of their decision-making, according to a new Emory University study. The research sheds light on why staunch Democrats and Republicans can hear the same information, but walk away with opposite conclusions.

(more…)

You have been warned!

You have been warned!


We should be used to this kind of bilge by now, but the absurdity of it all never ceases to amaze.

Prince Charles is warning that there are only 35 years left to save the planet from climate disaster, which represents a 33-year extension of his previous deadline, reports the Washington Times.

In March 2009, the heir to the British throne predicted that the world had 100 months “before we risk catastrophic climate change,” as pointed out by Climate Depot’s Marc Morano.

(more…)

Stephan Lewandowsky, that scion of psycho-psience who recently had a paper libelling climate sceptics retracted for its poor ethical standards, has given an interview which ends with this gem:

Lewdicrous

One thing that I would point out is that it’s very important for people to be skeptical and anticipate that people will be misleading to the public. Some of the misinformation that’s out there is not accidental. I think there’s quite a bit that’s put into the public discourse in order to have a political effect. It’s supposed to be wrong, but effective.

I think we need to illustrate this important point with some examples. So instead of this years climate quiz, we’ll have a barnstormer of quotes about climate that have been “put into the public discourse in order to have a political effect.” – Add your favourites, with links if possible, below.

(more…)

josh-nurse

Visit cartoons by Josh and buy something!

From the grauniad:
Speaking ahead of an inaugural speech he will give next week as the incoming president of the British Science Association (BSA), Nurse said it was not enough for scientists to sit on the sidelines and sneer when public figures expounded unscientific nonsense.

He urged researchers to forge relationships with politicians, lobbyists, religious figures and leaders of organisations in the hope that they might feel ashamed to misuse scientific evidence.

But if that approach failed, Nurse urged researchers to call offenders out in the media and challenge them in the strongest way possible. “When they are serial offenders they should be crushed and buried,” Nurse said.

The Nobel prize winner will use his presidential address to argue that science has been the most revolutionary act in human history. He will trace the origins of scientific thinking from ancient times through the Copernican and Darwinian revolutions to modern times and warn that threats to science have always existed.

Oh the irony. Copernicus was afraid to publish precisely because he knew that some Nobel Nurse establishment type bigwig would be down on him like a ton of bricks for propounding theory contrary to that the establishment consensus held as immutable.

Paul Nurse is a serial offender himself, and Josh nicely sends him up in this cartoon.

(more…)

Igloo time [image credit: Ansgar Walk / Wikipedia]

Igloo time
[image credit: Ansgar Walk / Wikipedia]


This is worth a look just for the last paragraph, which undermines most of the rest of it. Under the optimistic sub-heading ‘Warming to recommence’ we find:

‘Despite the warming hiatus, Knutti is convinced there is no reason to doubt either the existing calculations for the climate activity of greenhouse gases or the latest climate models.’

“Short-term climate fluctuations can easily be explained. They do not alter the fact that the climate will become considerably warmer in the long term as a result of greenhouse gas emissions,” says Knutti.

‘He believes that global warming will recommence as soon as solar activity, aerosol concentrations in the atmosphere and weather phenomena such as El Niño naturally start returning to the values of previous decades.’ [bold added]

Translation: as soon as the sun, the weather and volcanoes – all natural factors – allow, the world will start warming again. Who knew?

Farsnews report: Why Global Warming Is Taking a Break

Good to hear a warmist trashing his own theory in order to explain the lack of temperature rise this century – without realising it.

Climate quote of the week

Posted: August 12, 2014 by oldbrew in climate, humour, Psychobabble
Did I say that? [image credit: simpsons.wikia]

Did I say that?
[image credit: simpsons.wikia]

“The fundamental laws of physics say that as the temperature goes up, it has to get warmer,” Liu says.

Nice work Professor. Homer Simpson couldn’t have put it better.

So you still take "climate scientists" seriously?