Skip to main content

More Climate Delusion, Part 1692

By May 8, 2022Commentary

This stuff never ends, every day you can read the lies in the paper about climate change.  This is a disgrace to science.  Fortunately there are a few bloggers out there who are dedicated to doing real data and analysis.  One is Paul Homewood, and if you look at his site, the most recent posts feature a debunking of the usual nonsense pimped by the mainstream media about climate change causing more extreme weather.  This is a completely unsupported claim–we have more hurricanes, more tornadoes, more floods, more heat waves, etc. than ever before.  No we don’t.  We endure cycles of these events, just as we always have, and there is absolutely no data to suggest that it is any different now than it was a thousand years ago.  We have recency bias and information gathering bias.  We don’t have good records from more than 100 or 150 years ago, so we think what we see now, with our satellites and our weather stations all over the place and our made up statistical techniques and constant data “adjustments” represents some big change.  It doesn’t.  Meanwhile apparently all the climate terrorism, just like with CV-19, is apparently causing some people to have mental health issues.  I don’t know how to respond to that other than to say, use your freaking brain and some common sense.  Do you own work, don’t rely on “experts” ever.  They are human beings, prone to the same emotional fallacies as everyone else and for climate scientists, this is their moment in the (ever-hotter) sun, and they are milking it for all it is worth by flat-out lying to the public.  (Homewood Blog)

Join the discussion 5 Comments

  • MLR says:

    The problem is that our educational system and research funding is entirely geared to promoting the canard of anthropogenic global warming. Ever wonder why only emeritus professors are the “deniers?”

  • dripdropnews says:

    I’m in true disbelief about this. It’s so hard to believe that we have lost being scientific and truthful. The constant “spin” is step backwards. It’s hard to believe that we’ve moved from the information age to the disinformation age where the truth is “nuanced” and you can’t trust what people are saying. It’s terrible. Thanks for being a shining light in a dark time.

  • Fergie says:

    In case those of you following the climate hype are not familiar with it, there is another website that has been working to keep honest science going in this arena for more than a decade and that is Anthony Watt’s “Watt’s Up With That”, currently the world’s most widely read blog on climate change. It’s my go-to web site for honest climate information and debate just as “Healthy Skeptic” is my go-to website for the Covid situation.

    Here is the latest article from Anthony on his website where he first reviews how he as a meterologist got started in this whole project over a decade ago. Then he requests help in updating his original nationwide study on the site deterioration of our nations weather stations that resulted in the current website.

    Regardless of where you are “parked” on this issue, it’s worth reading the history of his first study and perhaps you may want to participate in his new update project.

    Palmer, Alaska

  • dell says:

    Similar process, perhaps off topic:

    2020 Elections. (Is the same process a part of so-called global warming.)

    Dinesh D’Souza is a well respected journalist.

    I only watched 15 minutes of it, starting around 17 min. I’ll revisit later. It’s amazing.

    I’d like to see a critique. Were NGO’s ‘rights’ organizations collecting votes and bringing them to the ballot box? If so, wouldn’t it be done during the day and only in a specific location?

    This is one of those “oh my” developments requiring further analysis.

    This is the official 2000 Mules movie.
    “2000 Mules,” a documentary film created by Dinesh D’Souza, exposes widespread, coordinated voter fraud in the 2020 election, sufficient to change the overall outcome.

  • John Oh says:

    British statistician George Box said “all models are wrong”. Later he added, “but some are useful.” Given the infinite variables involved in climate both short and long term and the unpredictability of phenomenal events that heavily influence the weather (volcanic eruptions, solar events) I have a lot of trouble understanding the certainty of the predictions that we’re all going to die if we don’t give up on just about everything right now. I don’t think implementing radical public policies like shutting down the oil industry should be based on models the accuracy of which won’t be known for a long time. None of us will be around to see how all these predictions work out in 100 or more years from now. Long after the checks have cleared. Dave Dixon’s analysis of data from local weather stations in Minnesota posted here was one of the best things I’ve come across about climate change recently. Thanks for following up with climate stuff and giving Dixon a platform.

Leave a comment