When scientists become advocates, advocacy masquerades as science. This danger is now being flagged in the pages of the Nature journal npg Climate Action. Author Ulf Buntgen worries: "I am concerned by climate scientists becoming climate activists, because scholars should not have a priori interests in the outcome of their studies. Likewise, I am worried about activists who pretend to be scientists, as this can be a misleading form of instrumentalization." https://www.nature.com/articles/s44168-024-00126-0 ". . . I argue that quasi-religious belief in, rather than the understanding of the complex causes and consequences of climate and environmental changes undermines academic principles. I recommend that climate science and climate activism should be separated conceptually and practically, and the latter should not be confused with science communication and public engagement. While this Comment is not a critique of climate activism per se, I am foremost concerned by an increasing number of climate scientists becoming climate activists, because scholars should not have a priori interests in the outcome of their studies. Like in any academic case, the quest for objectivity must also account for all aspects of global climate change research. While I have no problem with scholars taking public positions on climate issues, I see potential conflicts when scholars use information selectively or over-attribute problems to anthropogenic warming, and thus politicise climate and environmental change. Without self-critique and a diversity of viewpoints, scientists will ultimately harm the credibility of their research and possibly cause a wider public, political and economic backlash. Likewise, I am worried about activists who pretend to be scientists, as this can be a misleading form of instrumentalization. In fact, there is just a thin line between the use and misuse of scientific certainty and uncertainty, and there is evidence for strategic and selective communication of scientific information for climate action. . . . " Bingo.
When the science stands alone, the picture is different. Paper prepared by Richard Lindzen, William Happer, Steven Koonin and submitted April 16, 2024. Lindzen Happer Koonin climate science 4-24. THERE WILL BE DISASTROUS CONSEQUENCES FOR THE POOR, PEOPLE WORLDWIDE, FUTURE GENERATIONS AND THE WEST IF FOSSIL FUELS, CO2 AND OTHER GHG EMISSIONS ARE REDUCED TO “NET ZERO” CO2 is Essential to Our Food, and Thus to Life on Earth More CO2, Including CO2 from Fossil Fuels, Produces More Food. More CO2 Increases Food in Drought-Stricken Areas. Greenhouse Gases Prevent Us from Freezing to Death Enormous Social Benefits of Fossil Fuels “Net Zeroing” Fossil Fuels Will Cause Massive Human Starvation by Eliminating Nitrogen Fertilizer THE IPCC IS GOVERNMENT CONTROLLED AND THUS ONLY ISSUES GOVERNMENT OPINIONS, NOT SCIENCE SCIENCE DEMONSTRATES FOSSIL FUELS, CO2 AND OTHER GHGs WILL NOT CAUSE CATASTROPHIC GLOBAL WARMING AND EXTREME WEATHER Reliable Science is Based on Validating Theoretical Predictions With Observations, Not Consensus, Peer Review, Government Opinion or Cherry-Picked or Falsified Data The Models Predicting Catastrophic Warming and Extreme Weather Fail the Key Scientific Test: They Do Not Work, and Would Never Be Used in Science. 600 Million Years of CO2 and Temperature Data Contradict the Theory That High Levels of CO2 Will Cause Catastrophic Global Warming. Atmospheric CO2 Is Now “Heavily Saturated,” Which in Physics Means More CO2 Will Have Little Warming Effect. The Theory Extreme Weather is Caused by Fossil Fuels, CO2 and Other GHGs is Contradicted by the Scientific Method and Thus is Scientifically Invalid
Here's a fine example of advocacy masquerading as science. Fortunately the nonsense has been called out. Ryan Maue on “Global Temperature Shocks” Ryan Maue At this point of the analysis, the authors should have quit, yet they plowed ahead undaunted. . . .
We? There weren’t 8 billion people eating before nitrogen fertilizers were developed. It is true we could not feed 8 billion people without fossil fuels using agricultural practices common today. They could be fed, but we would have to adopt different agricultural practices. We have 8 billion people now because nitrogen fertilizers allowed commodity agriculture to survive. Without nitrogen fertilizers either you would starve, or agriculture would have to undergo a massive reorganization. North Korea is a microcosm of what life without nitrogen fertilizers would look like. Lots of starvation and malnutrition and saving your **** in a bucket to give to a farmer.
In the following documentary we find out that Mr. Al Gore's professor was a member of a group who wanted to link the price and supply of oil to the world's fiat currencies........ ... A Carbon Tax accomplishes exactly that......... while at the same time APPEARS to be going against BigOil??????????!!!!!!!!! That is actually rather brilliant MARKETING..... ..... https://topdocumentaryfilms.com/why...syqxWxFYvIDcHQgFoumZur0HUD9EtzQa0lU0yXFGEa4P4 AND... a Carbon Tax sets the stage for all that is explained in the Bill Gates lecture.... "Innovating to zero." ... ... This is kind of shocking..... thank you immensely for telling us about this!? This reminds me of a series of lectures by a former Atheist who had a near death experience and since that time has studied to become an Orthodox Jewish Rabbi....... Rabbi Alon Anava is a major leader in the fight against what Sir Winston Churchill termed "The High Cabal." Rabbi Alon Anava adds the Hebrew name for the same thing...... .... It is my opinion that the leaders of that "High Cabal" or Eruv Rav..... are terrified of President Donald J. Trump and have been using BigMedia that they own against him....... .... and they have been using their people in high places in the CIA and FBI as well. In the following documentary you will find out that Mr. Al Gore's professor.... was a part of a group who wanted to link the price and supply of oil to the fiat currencies of the world....... a Carbon Tax accomplishes exactly that......... and gives bureaucrats in the USA and Canada and all the world the control that they need to accomplish the specifics of the Bill Gates lecture..... "Innovating to zero." It is my opinion that the leaders of that "High Cabal" or Eruv Rav..... are terrified of President Donald J. Trump and have been using BigMedia that they own against him....... .... and they have been using their people in high places in the CIA and FBI as well. In the following documentary you will find out that Mr. Al Gore's professor.... was a part of a group who wanted to link the price and supply of oil to the fiat currencies of the world....... a Carbon Tax accomplishes exactly that......... and gives bureaucrats in the USA and Canada and all the world the control that they need to accomplish the specifics of the Bill Gates lecture..... "Innovating to zero." http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/religious-politics.618616/#post-1074804815
The absurd "methodology" of this "research" is unfortunately typical of CO2 climate narrative nonscience, which peer review is apparently unable to moderate.
Judith Curry remains a beacon of integrity in the politically compromised field of climate science. Fact checking the fact checkers on my Prager U video Posted on May 26, 2024 by curryja by Judith Curry Last January, I visited Prager U in California. I recorded several videos. Science.feedback.org has done a fact check on my 5 minute video, which is the topic of this post Continue reading →
Notice the following BALD, FLAT-OUT LIE in the putative "fact check": "There is no evidence that solar variations or volcanic activity are substantial drivers of recent climate change." There is in fact overwhelming peer-reviewed empirical evidence -- some of which Jack has posted links to in this forum -- showing that solar variation is the principal driver of recent climate change, whether you consider "recent" to mean the last two years or the last 200. "Fact checks" that deny that fact are nothing but blatant gaslighting.
