The Destructive Behavior of Climate Alarmists

Good for you. Do you equate the actions of the two crowds?

 

The climate crowd believes they are saving the planet. The anti-abortionists believe they are saving lives. Fanaticism can grow from both.

 

Not seeing any fascism from the greenies.

And BTW what the anti-choice folks are doing isn't fascism either. terrorism maybe but not fascism.

If you need examples of fascism look to Ronda Fascist in Floriduh, he's got it down cold.

 

Anyone who claims DeSantis is a fascist has never seen the real thing.

 

Oh, but I have and he is.

 

You are making it a political argument and attacking De Santis who has nothing to do with this thread which is about destructive behavior of climate alarmists.

Your deflection indicate that you can't answer it because you completely ignored the article,:

Green Fascism Looms Behind Veil Of Fake Benevolence…”Much More Radical Groups”

Excerpt:

In just a few years, an alarming new trend has gone viral. The “classic” green climate warriors like Greenpeace and the WWF are rapidly being outflanked and overtaken by much more radical groups who have given themselves frightening names such as “Extinction Rebellion” or “Last Generation”. Instead of taking to the streets simply placards and banners, these “activists” are swarming out in small groups armed with superglue, mashed potatoes or tomato soup. Their intention is to break the law in spectacular ways, without regard for the damages or consequences caused to others. Their indiscriminate attacks have targeted airports, artworks, museums, offices or the premises of ministries or administrations.

====

This is a common tactic of people who wants to get people off on a side issue that isn't on topic.

 

Doubtful on the former, certainly false on the latter.

 

Dude, that wasn't me. Republicans made the whole climate change thing political starting waaay back with the Ronny Raygun administration.

Deal with it.

 

That's a false history narrative. Please see Bernie Lewin, Searching for the Catastrophe Signal.

 

Nope.

 

OK. Where did you experience fascism?

 

Yawnnnn.......

Thank you for admitting you can't address this as you keep avoiding the post content as you continue your partisan based off topic bromide, here is the post that is terrifying you from your first post response in the thread Post #146 where you tried to create a false trail to Abortions clinics.

Green Fascism Looms Behind Veil Of Fake Benevolence…”Much More Radical Groups”

Excerpt:

In just a few years, an alarming new trend has gone viral. The “classic” green climate warriors like Greenpeace and the WWF are rapidly being outflanked and overtaken by much more radical groups who have given themselves frightening names such as “Extinction Rebellion” or “Last Generation”. Instead of taking to the streets simply placards and banners, these “activists” are swarming out in small groups armed with superglue, mashed potatoes or tomato soup. Their intention is to break the law in spectacular ways, without regard for the damages or consequences caused to others. Their indiscriminate attacks have targeted airports, artworks, museums, offices or the premises of ministries or administrations.

LINK

=====

It is clear you are trying to lead everyone away from the increasingly hostile Greens activities to YOUR one sided partisanship which is boring and lazy thinking.

 

A quick googling of your pal Bernie:

DERP

 

It runs fairly rampant in the former soviet states and south America.

Now you're going to demand I list the countries that have a "fascist government" because you know all of them deny having such a thing, but there are fascist elements in many places, including here. See Floriduh, for example.

 

"green fascism" is ****in' HILARIOUS!!!

Tell us another one!!

 

"Climate disinformation blog" is just a propaganda term. Your prejudice is your prison.

 

Ah. You weren't doing bad until you threw in Florida.

 

Ah so you are another debate free fella no wonder you can't address anything because you are not here to debate and doesn't know anything on the list you go.

Ciao Brutto.

 

He hasn't been on topic or addressed anything we bring up just duck and weave is all he can do here.

 

I read some of it. Seems pretty accurate to me. It also should be mentioned that it far from a minority opinion. Everyone seems to think the guy is a whack-job.

Except you, for some reason.

 

How am I supposed to disprove misinformation that you take on faith while denying the realty that's right in front of you? All the real climatologists agree that the planet is warming due to human action, but you guys find some guy with a degree in book-keeping for christ's sake and believe him when he self publishes on a blogsite instead of all the people who have actually studied the climate and published peer reviewed papers and in the face of nearly daily convincing evidence to the contrary.

I'm not arguing with you, nor am I debating with you. I am laughing at you. And I'm far from the only one.

 

Well, no.
Manufacturing consensus: the early history of the IPCC
Posted on January 3, 2018 by curryja
by Judith Curry
Short summary: scientists sought political relevance and allowed policy makers to put a big thumb on the scale of the scientific assessment of the attribution of climate change.

Bernie Lewin has written an important new book:

SEARCHING FOR THE CATASTROPHE SIGNAL:The Origins of The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

The importance of this book is reflected in its acknowledgements, in context of assistance and contributions from early leaders and participants in the IPCC:

This book would not have been possible without the documents obtained via Mike MacCracken and John Zillman. Their abiding interest in a true and accurate presentation of the facts prevented my research from being led astray. Many of those who participated in the events here described gave generously of their time in responding to my enquiries, they include Ben Santer, Tim Barnett, Tom Wigley, John Houghton, Fred Singer, John Mitchell, Pat Michaels . . . and many more. . . .

 

Dude, posting crap from deniers doesn't mean they are telling the truth. Literally almost nobody believes the **** you deniers are selling. The debate is over,

 

No, they do not.
Review Of Koonin’s “Unsettled”…Government, Scientific Institutions As “Instruments Of Hostile Forces”
By P Gosselin on 16. April 2023

Share this...
A German scientist asked if I would post the following text on behalf of William Walter Kay
===================================

Koonin’s Sociology of Climatology




By William Walter Kay BA JD

Although focused on hard science, Koonin’s Unsettled broaches Sociology of Climatology in Chapter 10 (WHO BROKE “THE SCIENCE” AND WHY); commencing:

Can it really be that a multiplicity of stakeholders in climate matters – scientists, scientific institutions, activists and NGOs, the media, politicians – are all contributing to misinformation in the service of persuasion?”

Koonin answers “yes”, suggesting the culprit is: “not some secret cabal, but rather a self-reinforcing alignment of perspectives and interests.” He then walks us through his “multiplicity of stakeholders.”

Climate apocalypticism attracts politicians wishing to keep the public terrified and clamoring for safety.

The media disseminates climate horror because “news is a business” and “if it bleeds it leads.” As newsrooms shrink overworked journalists, sans science degrees, cannot properly research climate stories:

…the general lack of knowledge of what the science actually says, the drama of extreme weather events and their heart-rending impact on people, and pressures within the industry all work against balanced coverage in the popular media.”

Governments, businesses and NGOs have “messages” that employees must deliver to stay employed or to attain promotions, tenure etc:

…more than a few climate contrarians have suffered public opprobrium and diminished career prospects for publicizing data that doesn’t support the “broken climate” meme.”

NGOs like 350.org, Union of Concerned Scientist, and Natural Resources Defence Council solicit donations with scary distortions of climate science. (This is off. Climate NGOs draw funds from Big Green philanthropies, vested corporate interests, and captured government agencies. Climateworks and Energy Foundation boast annual receipts, respectively, of $425 million and $230 million. Neither solicit from the public.)

According to Koonin: “individuals and organizations in the scientific community are demonstrably misrepresenting the science.”

Scientific institutions: “seem more concerned with making the science fit the narrative than ensuring the narrative fits the science.” Regarding climate:

…institutions that prepare the official assessment reports have a communication problem, often summarizing or describing the data in ways that are actively misleading.”

Scientists hype research, fudge uncertainty, and covet publicity.

The public believes whatever science authorities say, and presumes journalists know what they’re talking about. Authorities oblige the public’s abhorrence of gray areas by keeping them wholly in the dark.

As evidenced above, Koonin references mostly generic social phenomena. Financial pressure, groupthink and hype underly all discourse, not merely climate science. Koonin doesn’t adequately distinguish climate from other overegged topics, nor explain why climate is even on the agenda. Aware of this defect, he offers glimpses into the unusual treatment given Climatology; particularly the fear-borne ignorance exhibited by scientists whenever the topic arises. Climatology generates: “an eyes-shut-fingers-in-the-ears position I’ve never heard in any other scientific discussion.” And: “otherwise rigorous and analytical scientists abandon their critical faculties when discussing climate…”

Koonin rebukes the National Academies of Science for publishing reviews of climate assessments so lacking in objectivity as to betray an intent to manipulate. A 2019 joint climate statement, freighted with misinformation, signed by each NAS academy president, bewildered Koonin:

I’m quite sure that this personal statement of the presidents in a news release was not reviewed by the usual Academies procedures; if it had been, its deficiencies would have been corrected.”

Climatology also receives unique treatment from politicos and journos. Politicians must pitch renewable energy as the only way to solve an urgent crisis; because the Energy Transition won’t sell if framed as one option for solving some distant problem. Politicians won’t discuss climate science uncertainties, nor admit the true cost of the Energy Transition. Thus, when crafting climate messaging:

…the science is jettisoned in favor of The Science, and “simplified” for use in the political arena, which allows the required actions to be portrayed as simple as well – just eliminate fossil fuels to save the planet.”

Alarmist media articles aren’t just the result of overloaded, undereducated journos. A legion of “Climate Reporters” zealously monger doom.

Koonin understands that the Energy Transition is the dog wagging the Climate Change tail:

Science should not be partisan, but climate science’s intersection with energy policy all but guaranteed that it would become so.”

…as alternative energy grows, there is financial incentive for politicians to hype climate catastrophe.”

Unsettled is a naïf’s confession.

In 2004 Koonin thought Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming was a legit hypotheses sincerely held by honest scientists. Few climate contrarians, under 50, can say the same.

Koonin’s main claim is that the actual scientific literature doesn’t jibe with what alarmists call The Science. His testimony resonates because he’s a top-tier scientist who’s actually read the national and international climate assessments. The thought-fields Koonin wonders onto, however, are Climate Change Communication and Sociology of Scientific Knowledge. These too are sciences, complete with literary canons to which Unsettled’s 200+ footnotes make nary a reference.

Koonin apologizes for, and defends, the science establishment. He fears a corrupted Climatology undermines public confidence in the entire scientific project. He prefers “misinformation” but describes “disinformation.” Connecting his own dots, its obvious key US government agencies, and leading US scientific institutions, are instruments of hostile forces. This, added to the Energy Transition’s hobbling of the American economy, warrants designating climate alarmism as treason. Koonin ain’t there yet.

Source

Koonin, Stephen E. Unsettled: What Climate Science Tells Us, What it Doesn’t, And Why It Matters; BenBella Books, Dallas, TX, 2021; Chapter 10 “WHO BROKE ‘THE SCIENCE’ AND WHY” pages 185-96.

 

Judith Curry is in no sense a denier.