Author Topic: Pathological Science  (Read 537109 times)

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1878
    • View Profile
Re: Climate “Science” Sleaze Taints All it Touches
« Reply #1200 on: February 08, 2024, 07:30:54 AM »
2nd (or third today, I'm losing track) post. If you have a spare hour this podcast is well worth your time as they reenact some of the jawdropping testimony and cross examination that occurred Tuesday in Mann's supposed defamation trial. One of the things that came out is that Mann has serially defamed to a far greater degree than any of the claimed defamation (read "nonexistent") that came his way. Ugly and brutal.

And the British observers conducting this effort discuss the utter disconnection from reality the NPR piece I note below is. I was pleased to find others utterly flabbergasted by that piece.

Another bon mot: our noble narrators mention they are the only two reporters they've seen in the courtroom all day, every day, which raises the question: what is the source material used by NPR and other MSM orgs framing things to fit Mann's narrative? Moreover, when these reporters--who again have been in court every day and who have asked questions of Mann's lawyers before--sought point another series of questions the direction of Mann's lawyers just outside the courthouse, Mann's lawyers went back in to the courthouse, had a hushed conversation with the security guard on the door, before scurrying further inside. When our intrepid Brit tried to reenter, he was stopped at the door and told he could not enter. After some back and forth it turns out Mann's lawyers had told the guard they were being "stalked" by the reporter.

There's more to the tale worth hearing, but this false claim is emblematic of everything Mann and his torchbearers touch. And NPR will be reporting on it ... sometime soon, mayhaps.

Oh, and Judith Curry's testimony, particularly regarding Mann's claim she had "slept her way to the top," is all kinds of damning. Uh, where are the Me Too shock troops excoriating Mann for this blatant, sexist, pervaricating behavior? Let's ask the crickets, eh?

Mann, I mean, man I wish some of the alarmists that used to carry climate change water were around to tell us why we should ignore the Mann behind the keyboard.

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/climate-change-on-trial/id1713827256

Posted as an example of everything wrong with journalism these days. No mention of Mann’s sexist slander of Judith Curry, the poor statistical analysis, the unwillingness to share source code, of who is paying for Mann’s suits as NPR slings around guilt by association non sequiturs about oil companies and right wing boogie men as Steyn serves as his own attorney because he isn’t backed like Mann is as he has dragged these proceedings out for a decade precisely because he seeks to were down and bankrupt people with the gall to use protected speech to tell the truth as they see it. Behold this example of media malpractice and keep it in mind the next time some talking head proclaims her journalistic virtues, and then go count your silverware in case she stole some:


The Courts  Science

A Famous Climate Scientist Is In Court With Big Stakes For Attacks On Science (npr.org) 25
Posted by BeauHD on Tuesday February 06, 2024 @10:30PM from the climate-information-on-trial dept.

Julia Simon reports via NPR:

In a D.C. courtroom, a trial is wrapping up this week with big stakes for climate science. One of the world's most prominent climate scientists is suing a right-wing author and a policy analyst for defamation. The case comes at a time when attacks on scientists are proliferating, says Peter Hotez, professor of Pediatrics and Molecular Virology at Baylor College of Medicine. Even as misinformation about scientists and their work keeps growing, Hotez says scientists haven't yet found a good way to respond. "The reason we're sort of fumbling at this is it's unprecedented. And there is no roadmap," he says. The climate scientist at the center of this trial is Michael Mann. The professor of earth and environmental science at the University of Pennsylvania gained prominence for helping make one of the most accessible, consequential graphs in the history of climate science. First published in the late 1990s, the graph shows thousands of years of relatively stable global temperatures. Then, when humans start burning lots of coal and oil, it shows a spike upward. Mann's graph looks like a hockey stick lying on its side, with the blade sticking straight up. The so-called "hockey stick graph" was successful in helping the public understand the urgency of global warming, and that made it a target, says Kert Davies, director of special investigations at the Center for Climate Integrity, a climate accountability nonprofit. "Because it became such a powerful image, it was under attack from the beginning," he says....

https://science.slashdot.org/story/24/02/06/2254240/a-famous-climate-scientist-is-in-court-with-big-stakes-for-attacks-on-science?utm_source=rss1.0moreanon&utm_medium=feed

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1878
    • View Profile
WT Actual F?
« Reply #1201 on: February 08, 2024, 04:51:10 PM »
Just read a report the the DC jury found for Mann. Time to face facts: if you aren’t part of the “Progressive” herd you won’t get a fair trial in DC.

I imagine it would be too much to hope that the judge sets the verdict aside given all the misbehavior by Mann and his legal team….

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1878
    • View Profile
Re: Pathological Science
« Reply #1202 on: February 10, 2024, 05:53:29 AM »
I am beyond extremely annoyed by this verdict--what trial was this DC jury watching?--and was wondering what sort of appeals were available to Steyn; I'm glad to learn this is not over.

[Jonathan H. Adler] Climate Scientist Michael Mann Wins Defamation Suit Against Mark Steyn and Rand Simberg
Climate defamation trial intensifies

•The Volokh Conspiracy by Jonathan H. Adler / Feb 9, 2024 at 5:01 PM//keep unread//hide
Is this article about Politics?


[The jury found no real damages, but gave a sizeable punitive award that could be challenged on appeal. ]

Yesterday, a jury in the District of Columbia ruled for climate scientist Michael Mann in his long-running defamation suit against writers Mark Steyn and Rand Simberg, for blog posts the two had written challenging the validity of his research and comparing Penn State's investigation into Mann's alleged misconduct with the University's whitewash of Jerry Sandusky. The suit was initially filed in 2012, and initially included National Review and the Competitive Enterprise Institute as defendants.

The jury awarded Mann nominal compensatory damages of $1 against each defendant, but then added punitive damage awards of $1 million against Steyn and $1,000 against Simberg. I would think that these damages–if not the verdict itself–are likely to be appealed.

The punitive damages would seem to be the most vulnerable part of the judgment. Under existing Supreme Court precedent, excessive punitive damages violate Due Process. So, for example, in BMW of North America v. Gore, the Court held that a punitive damage award of $2 million was excessive given that the plaintiff had only been awarded $2,000 in compensatory damages. This 1000-to-1 ratio, the Court held, could not be justified even considering the extent to which the defendant had engaged in egregious conduct.

There is some question whether BMW would continue to attract a majority of the Court today. That decision was 5-4. Justice Stevens wrote the majority, joined by Justices O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter, and Breyer. Justices Scalia, Thomas, Ginsburg and Rehnquist dissented. Nonetheless, the BMW holding is binding on lower courts.

While Mann prevailed at trial, the proceedings also unearthed some slimy conduct on his part, including his disparagement of scientists with whom he disagrees and behind-the-scenes efforts to suppress articles by scientists he does not like.

This long-running litigation may not be over. Steyn's camp has indicated they intend to challenge the punitive damages award (if not other aspects of the decision). Mann's attorney also told the NYT they still plan to appeal the prior decisions that had removed CEI and National Review from the case: "Asked about Competitive Enterprise Institute and National Review, John Williams said, 'They're next.'"

*  *  *

A post-script. Here is a disclaimer I have included in prior posts about this litigation:

DISCLOSURE: As I've noted in prior posts on this case, I am a contributing editor at National Review Online, which means I have a fancier byline when I submit articles to the publication and occasionally contribute to The Corner and Bench Memos. It is not a salaried position. I also worked at the Competitive Enterprise Institute from 1991 to 2000 — many years before the events at issue in this litigation. If either of these facts makes you suspect bias on my part, so be it.

Note that while I was once something of a climate skeptic (much like Jerry Taylor), my views have changed. Today I have profound disagreements with CEI on the subject of climate change, having argued in defense of the scientific "consensus" on climate change and in favor of a carbon tax, among other measures to address the climate threat. My interest in this litigation arises from this implications for robust debate on matters of public concern, as I explained in this post.

The post Climate Scientist Michael Mann Wins Defamation Suit Against Mark Steyn and Rand Simberg appeared first on Reason.com.

https://reason.com/volokh/2024/02/09/climate-scientist-michael-mann-wins-defamation-suit-against-mark-steyn-and-rand-simberg/


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18518
    • View Profile
Is sea ice melting or is it not?
« Reply #1203 on: February 16, 2024, 04:59:29 AM »
https://api.theepochtimes.com/article/un-says-melting-arctic-ice-is-a-key-indicator-of-climate-change-but-its-not-melting-5580038?ea_src=frontpage&ea_med=premium-report-1

But this "data" appears like it is from satellites which would only measure the surface extent of sea ice.
Elsewhere I read the ice is getting thinner over the oceans which satellites would not pick up.   

It is so hard to get a straight answer.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18518
    • View Profile
political approach to climate change
« Reply #1204 on: February 22, 2024, 05:02:39 AM »
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2024/02/21/exclusive-leaked-confidential-leftist-document-details-plot-to-pressure-republicans-into-protecting-bidens-radical-green-energy-agenda/

Who in their right mind would not want to protect our climate, our planet?

How do Repubs do this (show concern and the recognition it is something very worthy of attention)without destroying our economy?

Just calling it a hoax, just answering well China and India are now the biggest polluters is not going to placate those who are concerned.

Just my thoughts.
Anyone with any thoughts on this?





Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69424
    • View Profile
Re: Pathological Science
« Reply #1205 on: February 22, 2024, 06:14:06 AM »
EXCELLENT QUESTION!

FWIW, here is what I do:

Core principle-- embrace opportunities to express congruence. 

For example, here on FHOF, despite GM's snark, I regularly posted about plastics in the environment and efforts to do something about them.

On my FB page, I regularly share clips of someone doing random acts of kindness to a wild animal in trouble, often with human technology e.g. freeing an owl or a sea turtle or seal trapped in fishing line-- always with the heading of "Working our Way back to the Garden".

The thing to understand about lefties/Dems/greens is that they begin with the Heart, not Logic.   There position is a statement of Faith, and in the face of Logic (In point of fact what you are suggesting creates a result contrary to your intentions etc) they just dig in deeper and take our Logic as proof that we lack Heart.

To communicat with such a person, the first order of business is what is sometimes called the Ransberger Pivot-- to converse with "we" instead of "you" and "me"-- this means communicating that in point of fact we SHARE Heart.   Hence my sharing "Working our Way Back to the Garden" clips on my FB page.

With this in place, they become more receptive to working towards our Shared goal of bringing our Earth bac to the Garden of Nature.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18262
    • View Profile
Re: political approach to climate change
« Reply #1206 on: February 22, 2024, 07:03:55 AM »
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2024/02/21/exclusive-leaked-confidential-leftist-document-details-plot-to-pressure-republicans-into-protecting-bidens-radical-green-energy-agenda/

Who in their right mind would not want to protect our climate, our planet?

How do Repubs do this (show concern and the recognition it is something very worthy of attention)without destroying our economy?

Just calling it a hoax, just answering well China and India are now the biggest polluters is not going to placate those who are concerned.

Just my thoughts.
Anyone with any thoughts on this?

ccp is right on this. We shouldn't answer their alarmism with silence, we should address the issue with honesty, real facts and a real plan. (Details of which are in these threads.) Maybe a ten point plan like the Contract with America, and some underlying principles.

Energy needs to be abundant, not scarce.

Base energy needs to be round the clock, not sporadic.

Wind and solar have a role.

Nuclear has a bigger role being the largest source known of carbon free energy.

Prosperity has a role, solutions cost money.

Fossil fuels have a role in the transition.

Getting emissions down here at a high cost while production moves to dirtier places is no solution.

If building more nuclear power capacity takes 10 years, the time to start was 10 years ago.  Next best is now.

We won't force anything onto the grid until the grid is fully powered to handle it.

Widespread blackouts and brownout are a sign of a third world country and we won't accept moving backward on that score.

Restricting our mobility and our freedom isn't an option.

International agreements, if any, will include India, China etc.

Besides that it was a Republican President who took on slavery, it was a Republican President who started the EPA. Who knew?

They want a divisive political issue.  We want clean, sustainable solutions that help not harm the  people.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2024, 07:15:04 AM by DougMacG »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69424
    • View Profile
Re: Pathological Science
« Reply #1207 on: February 22, 2024, 07:27:07 AM »
Very good Doug!

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18518
    • View Profile
NPR/PBS survey
« Reply #1208 on: February 22, 2024, 07:42:15 AM »
people's concern about Climate:

https://www.npr.org/2023/08/03/1191678009/climate-change-republicans-economy-natural-disasters-biden-trump-poll

Just think if Trump could outline a plan that would both address and give attention to Climate Study AND preserve out economy.

That might help win over some who are on the fence.

Having seen some shows that present evidence of Climate Change and the best explanation is man made
it is wrong to simply and blindly accept it as fact.
But it is also wrong to simply and blindly call it horsecrap too.

It seems that Repubs like to focus only on issues they deem as "winning" for them.
Climate could be a winning issue if handled properly.

But calling it all a hoax is certainly a loser position.




Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1878
    • View Profile
Re: NPR/PBS survey
« Reply #1209 on: February 22, 2024, 02:22:40 PM »
people's concern about Climate:

https://www.npr.org/2023/08/03/1191678009/climate-change-republicans-economy-natural-disasters-biden-trump-poll

Just think if Trump could outline a plan that would both address and give attention to Climate Study AND preserve out economy.

That might help win over some who are on the fence.

Having seen some shows that present evidence of Climate Change and the best explanation is man made
it is wrong to simply and blindly accept it as fact.
But it is also wrong to simply and blindly call it horsecrap too.

It seems that Repubs like to focus only on issues they deem as "winning" for them.
Climate could be a winning issue if handled properly.

But calling it all a hoax is certainly a loser position.

Alarmists are the ones who make human impact of the environment an all or nothing proposition, accusing those of us that take issue with their trillions of dollar remediation schemes that just so happen to put them in control of just about every level of power from regulation to production to finance to consumption, of being “deniers.” Humans are just one contributor to the huge list of variables impacting the ever changing climate, one that was at times historically much warmer long before humans were on the scene.

Those alarmists do propagate and embrace a number of hoaxes to further their schemes, schemes which to my mind are more about assuming control in such a way they can force all human actions to be conducted under the aegis of a command economy that they, as they of course are so much brighter than the rest of us, command, despite the abject failure of all previous efforts to force command economic schemas.

The only way to overcome those abject failures and convince people to embrace their dubious prescriptions are through exaggerated claims and prophecies of doom, so that is just what they vend, at least until they control things to the point they need no longer concern themselves with what the hoi poli prefer, and then likely embracing the techniques other command authoritarians have: “reeducation” and outright liquidation, both of which some alarmists have already called for.

Those of us that prefer freedom to tyranny and market driven solutions to mandated ones that invariably fail to deliver need to resist these efforts to stampede voters toward authoritarian alarmist ends. We moreover should not let alarmists determine and define the terms of debate and resists their efforts to cast all that don’t join the stampede as being unconcerned with how humans negatively impact the environment.
« Last Edit: February 23, 2024, 06:05:45 AM by Body-by-Guinness »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18518
    • View Profile
Re: Pathological Science
« Reply #1210 on: February 23, 2024, 07:34:10 AM »
"Those of us that prefer freedom to tyranny and market driven solutions to mandated ones that invariably fail to deliver need to resist these efforts to stampede voters toward authoritarian alarmist ends. We moreover should not let alarmists determine and define the terms of debate and resists their efforts to cast all that don’t join the stampede as being unconcerned with how humans negatively impact the environment. "

Yes.   WE need to define the terms of the debate, the controversies, and the evidence, and the prescriptions to combat  with *agreed* upon solutions, all of which have pros and cons.

Just like in Medicine - there are different approaches to treating disease (most times) and the patient with their doctors decide which to choose from with pros and cons taken into account.

With man made climate change -

1st what is the evidence for and against
2nd how strong is it for and against
3rd what can be done - and are their more then one option and pros and cons of each
4th is watchful observation an option

instead of
The world will come to an end in 12 yrs and we must shut down all coal oil and gas now
and take every fossil fuel engine out of commission now.


Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1878
    • View Profile
Re: Pathological Science
« Reply #1211 on: February 23, 2024, 08:44:35 AM »
"Those of us that prefer freedom to tyranny and market driven solutions to mandated ones that invariably fail to deliver need to resist these efforts to stampede voters toward authoritarian alarmist ends. We moreover should not let alarmists determine and define the terms of debate and resists their efforts to cast all that don’t join the stampede as being unconcerned with how humans negatively impact the environment. "

Yes.   WE need to define the terms of the debate, the controversies, and the evidence, and the prescriptions to combat  with *agreed* upon solutions, all of which have pros and cons.

Just like in Medicine - there are different approaches to treating disease (most times) and the patient with their doctors decide which to choose from with pros and cons taken into account.

With man made climate change -

1st what is the evidence for and against
2nd how strong is it for and against
3rd what can be done - and are their more then one option and pros and cons of each
4th is watchful observation an option

instead of
The world will come to an end in 12 yrs and we must shut down all coal oil and gas now
and take every fossil fuel engine out of commission now.

I highly recommend following this blog. It doesn't outright answer the questions you posed, but does a great job of outlining the complexity of the question and usually destroys alarmist propaganda and claims:

https://wattsupwiththat.com

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18518
    • View Profile
Re: Pathological Science
« Reply #1212 on: February 23, 2024, 10:51:51 AM »
BBG:
looks like a good resource thanks

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1878
    • View Profile
Bio Prof Fired for Stating X/Y Chromosones Determine Gender Unfired
« Reply #1213 on: February 26, 2024, 12:50:45 PM »
This fits more than one place, but given the patholgical disregard of the sort of "settled science" "Progressives" whip their skippies to when it supports a cause they favor, I'll drop it here:

https://legalinsurrection.com/2024/02/st-philips-college-reinstates-fired-prof-who-taught-x-and-y-chromosomes-determines-sex/?utm_source=feedly&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=st-philips-college-reinstates-fired-prof-who-taught-x-and-y-chromosomes-determines-sex


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18518
    • View Profile
Epoch Times: problems with climate data
« Reply #1215 on: March 01, 2024, 04:07:30 AM »

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1878
    • View Profile
At Some Point in the Future the Sky Will Fall …
« Reply #1216 on: March 02, 2024, 06:01:30 PM »
… and if it doesn’t you are unlikely to remember the original predictions, making our panic mongering a win/win:

https://wattsupwiththat.com/failed-prediction-timeline/

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69424
    • View Profile
Re: Pathological Science
« Reply #1217 on: March 04, 2024, 05:11:32 PM »
That is rather fg awesome.

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1878
    • View Profile
The Road to Low Information Serfdom
« Reply #1218 on: March 07, 2024, 10:33:14 AM »
"Low information voters" is a term I most commonly see used pejoratively by "Progressives" and their handmaidens when describing those that don't vote as their moral superiors would have them vote, meaning those wretched Republicans and all others that don't allow themselves to be stampeded into acting upon this noble cause and associated demands and sacrifices or that.

But, confound it, sometimes low information is a virtue rather than a curse, like when the unwashed masses need to embrace a goal without understanding the associated costs and impacts thereof, such as "Net Zero." This piece seeks to fill that info gap. Expect those who claim to abhor low information voters to do their best to conceal this honest assessment from those the left seek to manipulate into serfdom.

Forward provided below; the rest at the link:

Foreword

By Lord Frost of Allenton

The message in this briefing from Professor Gordon Hughes could hardly be more urgent. It is that the energy transition, as currently structured as part of the broader net zero policy, will lead to another ‘policy fiasco’. He rightly says that we are ‘pos- turing about targets that are patently not achievable and might be economically ruinous’, and urges a rethink of the strategy before it is too late.

The view of Western governments and of the expert class that supports their Net Zero policies is that the necessary tran- sition can be accomplished at limited cost. The UK’s Climate Change Committee argues that the fiscal cost of transforming our energy system will be an average of around 1–2% of GDP per year between now and 2050, and that this investment in new energy technology will actually improve the country’s growth performance. Believe that if you will.
Professor Hughes is more honest. He points out that inde- pendent experts assess the real cost to be at least 5% of GDP for the next couple of decades, and potentially even higher. He notes that we can’t find this money by redeploying it from other investment areas, because we already invest, net, almost nothing in assets other than housing. It’s clear that we can’t borrow such sums without risk of a fiscal crisis. So the only way of doing it is to reduce consumption by 8–10% over two decades – and, even then, only if the necessary funds can be extracted by taxation. This is doubtful when the tax burden is already at its highest point since the war.

Put these propositions to the Net Zero proponents, and you will be told there is no need to worry. Costs will magically come down, new technology will somehow be invented, and we will find ourselves in the new promised land of clean, green, growth that will pay for everything. But they never give any evidence for believing this – and, where we can check what they say, for example in the real costs of wind power, we can see that these cost reductions are simply not happening.

The real world cannot be avoided. As Professor Hughes says, either we must be honest with the people and be clear that they are going to have to pay at a currently unanticipated level, or we must extend the time period for the transition – that is, delay the Net Zero 2050 target, perhaps out till 2070 or 2075. Failure to do either – sadly, perhaps the most likely outcome – will mean that we simply muddle on, pretending we are making progress, spending at high levels, but achieving little. Meanwhile the rest of the world outside the West will look on, incredulous at this unprecedented act of economic self harm.

This whole debate badly needs more honesty and openness. Professor Hughes’paper is an important contribution to it. I hope policymakers are listening.

https://www.thegwpf.org/content/uploads/2024/03/Hughes-Financing-Energy-Transition.pdf?mc_cid=b2426b62a0

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1878
    • View Profile
Posh Prophets of Perdition
« Reply #1219 on: March 09, 2024, 08:10:16 AM »
Entitled idiots beget more of the same:

These posh eco-loons need to check their privilege

The upper-crust halfwits of Just Stop Oil are causing misery to ordinary people.

Julie Burchill

21st February 2024

These posh eco-loons need to check their privilege

POLITICS
UK

Reading about Cressida Gethin, the latest Just Stop Oil protester to be convicted of causing a nuisance, I found myself thinking of the strange days when British débutantes, young women making their first appearance in upper-class society, used to curtsey to a cake. I also thought of their other odd rituals, such as the parlour game, ‘Are You There, Moriarty?’, as splendidly showcased recently in Netflix’s One Day. Such customs appear perfectly reasonable to the ruling class, while utterly insane to the rest of us.

The last débutantes were presented to Queen Elizabeth II in 1958, after which the wise old bird abolished the ceremony, knowing how anachronistic it appeared. From then on, in the absence of a monarch to curtsey to, those young women who wished to do ‘the season’, and find themselves a husband at the end of it, would instead genuflect to an eight-foot-tall cake. I suppose it made sense to them, in the way that stopping cars carrying sick children being taken to hospital makes sense to the Just Stop Oil mob. Maybe you need to be born in a certain class, with a certain kind of cretinous confidence, not to feel totally ridiculous when doing either of these things.

Gethin is a 22-year-old music student who, among other things, clambered on to a gantry over the M25 in 2022. In doing so, she ruined the trips of 4,000 airline passengers. Whether swinging from gantries or attempting to destroy great art, these young people have the air of never having heard the word ‘No’.

Why are the climate fanatics all so posh? The Just Stop Oil activists are always called Cressida or Amy Rugg-Easey or Indigo Rumbelow. (Rumbelow has inspired an amusing Twitter game called Find Your Silly Posh Girl Name ‘by combining a colour with a defunct shop’.) In this, JSO is simply carrying on the glorious tradition of Extinction Rebellion, the leading lights of which had such names as Robin Ellis-Cockcroft and Robin Boardman-Pattinson.

Infamously, Boardman-Pattinson opined in 2019 that ‘air travel should only be used in emergencies’, despite having been on a number of skiing trips that very year, which he had foolishly posted on social media. It’s no wonder Cressida Gethin picked on desperate sun-seekers to make her point. Like the dowager countess in Downton Abbey who once asked, ‘What is a weekend?’, posh people who do nothing find it hard to understand what a holiday means to ordinary folk.

Like aristocrats down the ages, these posh clowns get together and breed new generations of clowns. Trans activist Riz Possnett, who glued her hands to the floor of the Oxford Union to protest against feminist Kathleen Stock last year, is the daughter of Extinction Rebellion activist Robert Possnett. He has been arrested several times for making a nuisance of himself. He once glued himself to a Brexit Party bus. The bananas don’t fall far from the tree in this family’s case.

Possnett was once a member of a ‘band’ called Working Class Broccoli, even though her father is a wealthy businessman and her mother is the chief executive of South Cambridgeshire district council. They live in a five-bedroomed house, complete with a swimming pool, in a Suffolk village. Who could blame Tory MP Sir John Hayes, chairman of the Common Sense Group, for opining to the Telegraph that Riz had ‘gone off the rails’ because she hailed from a ‘deranged bourgeois liberal family, blinded by privilege’?
Trans: the medical scandal of the century?

The privileged have always been drawn to ecological concerns – as I wrote of King Charles many moons ago: ‘It’s easy for the rich to be Friends of the Earth – it’s always been a good friend to them.’ Environmentalism gives our rulers a new way to corral and control hoi polloi now that the old ways of pushing us around are deemed unprogressive.

It is striking that only white people of a certain class and level of over-education enjoy making commuters’ lives a misery. And it is heartening that the people pleading with them to get out of the way are of every colour, creed and class imaginable. Think of the rousing attempts by a crowd to pull a pair of XR clowns from the roof of a rush-hour commuter train (electric!) in Canning Town back in 2019. Or take the summer of 2023, when Stratford schoolchildren were seen remonstrating with Just Stop Oil for making them late to lessons, in some cases ripping protesters’ banners from their hands.

A hastily deleted tweet by XR, comparing its activists to Rosa Parks, probably wasn’t the cleverest move. Not least as every climate-change protest is so overwhelmingly white that it makes the Lib Dem party conference look like the Notting Hill Carnival.

It’s telling that Cressida Gethin has taken two years out of her studies to make a nuisance of herself. Gap years, self-indulgent and virtue-signalling as they were, at least used to be about helping under-privileged people have better lives, however briefly. They were about giving something back. In Gethin’s case, hers is about attempting to drag people back to the Dark Ages, when travel was only for the rich and the poor were expected to stay in one place all their lives – like cattle. A great number of those 4,000 souls whose holidays she ruined will have worked all year round in jobs they don’t like to pay for that week of escape. They will never have the privilege of doing a thing they love for a living, as Gethin will undoubtedly get to do, as soon as she has had enough of playing the fool.

Surveying the antics of the upper-crust, half-wit eco-loons of today, curtseying to a cake suddenly looks quite sensible.

Julie Burchill’s new play, Making Marilyn, co-authored with Daniel Raven, will be at Brighton Palace Pier in May. Get tickets here.

https://www.spiked-online.com/2024/02/21/these-posh-eco-loons-need-to-check-their-privilege/

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1878
    • View Profile
Poor White Ursines Starving Redux
« Reply #1220 on: March 09, 2024, 12:06:13 PM »
2nd post. Oh dears, the BBC rolls out the starving polar bears again (I’ve also bumped into similar hand wringing closer to home). Problem is, they are not, as this piece points out. Also some good info about weather station siting issues with the large majority used by the MET (the UK’s central climate bureau) being of inferior quality, with the MET knowing it:

https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/the-climate-scaremongers-its-time-for-the-starving-polar-bears-again-trouble-is-theyre-thriving/


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18518
    • View Profile
Escape from the hell on Earth - lets all move to a nicer place - Mars
« Reply #1222 on: March 11, 2024, 06:43:08 AM »
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/scientists-make-kombucha-discovery-that-may-unlock-life-on-mars/ar-AA1gEbdp?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=a2149f56544048c4a078ec866853353b&ei=15

" As wildfires, floods and earthquakes continue to ravage the world, it’s no wonder experts are planning escape routes from our trouble-ridden planet - and one involves a fizzy drink."

 :roll:

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1878
    • View Profile
I Must Have Missed the Memo
« Reply #1223 on: March 16, 2024, 08:33:11 PM »
Those of us that take issue w/ green energy scams are apparently conspiring to launch a conspiracy. Or something:

https://realclimatescience.com/2024/03/the-vast-right-wing-conspiracy/#gsc.tab=0

The Church of Anthropomorphic Climate Apocalypse owns the media, colleges, over half the government, and every nitwit that abandons their critical faculties in favor of whatever greatest, latest, bit of sky-is-falling hyperventilation being peddled by all the above and yet we skeptics—and if it don’t have skeptics it ain’t science—are the ones wielding inordinate power? Just what are these CACA fools smoking?

ETA: Here’s what an actual argument using real data looks like. Note one interesting feature: it doesn’t cite any vast conspiracy while making its case.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2024/03/15/the-holocene-climatic-optimum-and-the-pre-industrial/

« Last Edit: March 16, 2024, 08:55:59 PM by Body-by-Guinness »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18262
    • View Profile
Re: I Must Have Missed the Memo, (climate 'science')
« Reply #1224 on: March 17, 2024, 07:34:00 AM »
Great points made. Pointing out facts on the other side of an argument is not some great conspiracy, it's due diligence they should have done before ramming solutions down our throats with government mandates and coercion.

Why do we compare the amount warmed with a little Ice Age, an abnormal time? Why not compare with a time when they named Greenland 'Greenland'?

Doesn't fit the narrative.  But it isn't science when you pick data that only advance your agenda. What about Inconvenient Truths?

Even if it was a great solution, how do you build, transport, install wind turbines without using fossil fuels? Did anyone on the Left ever think about that?

I live in a cold climate, left leaning state. The idea of taking away natural gas from our pipelines right now has not been fully thought through. When I have a tenant's furnace or boiler go out, it is a life-threatening, end of the world situation (to them) even if I bring them electric heaters to use until the problem is fixed.  Same people vote for representatives who want to take away natural gas furnaces. Good grief.

The switch from coal to natural gas accounts for nearly all of the progress we've made on CO2 emissions. Do we celebrate that as progress? No. We celebrate the things that are not making a measurable difference and will never solve the problem.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2024, 08:18:24 AM by DougMacG »



DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18262
    • View Profile
Pathological Science, 'carbon free' wind energy
« Reply #1227 on: March 24, 2024, 10:55:39 AM »
Why wouldn't we just harness the wind more widely and have zero carbon emissions?

Of course we know it takes all these trucks full of diesel (and ships) to transport each part of the turbine to it's destination.

What is never mentioned is the concrete required.

Manufacturing a cubic yard of traditional concrete emits about 400 pounds of carbon dioxide,
https://www.machinerypartner.com/blog/concrete-is-one-of-the-biggest-contributors-to-carbon-emissions-new-technologies-could-change-that

The footings are 9 feet thick and 60 feet in diameter and require 30 to 40 truckloads of concrete – about 300 cubic yards. Each footing weighs about 2 million pounds and is not removed from the soil when a turbine tower is decommissioned.
https://www.windsystemsmag.com/cutting-the-concrete/#:~:text=The%20footings%20are%209%20feet,concrete%20%E2%80%93%20about%20300%20cubic%20yards.

40 truckload, 2 million pounds of concrete per turbine delivered to rural areas, all transported by EVs is still a massive amount of CO2, times 80,000 wind turbines s far, https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/how-many-turbines-are-contained-us-wind-turbine-database?items_per_page=6#:~:text=As%20of%20January%202022%2C%20the,plus%20Puerto%20Rico%20and%20Guam).

All this to supply less than 4% of our total energy usage.

And for every mW of wind capacity, one mW of gas or coal generating capacity is required for those times (70% of the time?) when the wind doesn't blow.

https://www.ans.org/news/article-638/the-economics-of-wind-power/#:~:text=A%20typical%20wind%20farm%20would,times%20when%20electricity%20is%20needed.

The more we build solar and wind versus other 'carbon free' sources such as nuclear, the more we are committed permanently (?) to oil, coal and gas.  Who knew? Follow the money.

https://www.nsenergybusiness.com/features/oil-companies-renewable-energy/
« Last Edit: March 24, 2024, 11:05:44 AM by DougMacG »


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18262
    • View Profile
'carbon free' wind energy - continued
« Reply #1229 on: March 26, 2024, 11:07:29 AM »
https://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/renewable/offshore-wind-now-costs-more-than-double-the-original-estimates-in-new-york/

It's the wind.  It's free, or something.  The know-it-all Green-Left tells us exactly what we need and why we need it and how it actually costs less and then they get the cost wrong by double.

Try sending in half your electric bill payment sometime and see how that goes for you.

Whatever costs they incur, we pay all of it.  One way or the other.

California is paying twice what other states are paying for electricity, but that tells half the story.  The other states are loaded with mandates and green energy goals too.  Recall the Texas winter storm outage a few years back.  So-called red Texas is one of the worst.

We are all paying twice too much for someone else's agenda, except for those paying twice that, and it isn't the best way to cut emissions.

Women and children and poor families are hit the hardest. Who cares, certainly the Democrats.
« Last Edit: March 26, 2024, 02:54:27 PM by Crafty_Dog »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69424
    • View Profile
Re: Pathological Science
« Reply #1230 on: March 26, 2024, 02:54:51 PM »
Kill the whales!

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1878
    • View Profile
Re: 'carbon free' wind energy - continued
« Reply #1231 on: March 27, 2024, 02:02:15 PM »
Women and children and poor families are hit the hardest. Who cares, certainly the Democrats.

But then the Dems get to offer subsidies to the downtrodden masses they created and pass themselves off as rescuers for inefficiently addressing the condition they worked overtime to create. Good work if you can get it.

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1878
    • View Profile
Climate the Movie
« Reply #1232 on: March 28, 2024, 06:16:41 PM »
I’ll be watching it this weekend; I’ve encountered numerous rave reviews.

Note: Google/Youtube is said to have shadowbanned this flick. As such I provide the Bitchute link:

https://www.bitchute.com/video/ONMGnSiOLhjG/

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1878
    • View Profile
Exploding Population Predictions Implode
« Reply #1233 on: April 03, 2024, 06:03:47 PM »
In junior high I was taken on a field trip to the University of Chicago’s Circle Campus where Erlich’s Malthusian tome The Population Bomb was a topic of discussion and we 7th graders were told one of the critical issues we would have to wrestle with was what to do with all the excess, unsupportable, humans.

Just shy of 50 years later, not so much. Birth rates are down in most nations, well below rates of replacement, which all serves to illustrate that today’s doomsayer may very well end up being as wrong as they could be. If only the Church of Anthropomorphic Climate Apocalypse would let examples like this inform them and their CACA dictates:

https://nypost.com/2024/04/03/opinion/the-world-struggling-to-make-more-babies-the-population-bomb-was-wrong/

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1878
    • View Profile
Re: Climate the Movie
« Reply #1234 on: April 04, 2024, 07:58:51 AM »
I’ll be watching it this weekend; I’ve encountered numerous rave reviews.

Note: Google/Youtube is said to have shadowbanned this flick. As such I provide the Bitchute link:

https://www.bitchute.com/video/ONMGnSiOLhjG/

I've indeed watched Climate The Movie and it is indeed a powerful, well sourced and documented, and chilling indictment of the Church of Anthropomorphic Climate Apocalypse and all the pathologies that ensue once CACA "science" takes root.

Shadow banned YouTube (Guulag) link here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOAUsvVhgsU


Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1878
    • View Profile
No LNG for Thee
« Reply #1235 on: April 04, 2024, 01:06:27 PM »
2nd post. YOu know all the hoopla over LNG being extra specially carbon pollutie or whatever? It seems it was based on a single, non-peer reviewed "study:"

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2024/04/03/the-entire-push-to-halt-new-natural-gas-exports-traces-back-to-one-ivy-league-prof-and-his-shaky-study/

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1878
    • View Profile
Remember Those Islands Climate Change was Going to Leave Covered w/ Water?
« Reply #1236 on: April 06, 2024, 05:24:37 PM »
They are increasing in land mass instead:

https://dailysceptic.org/2024/04/06/islands-that-climate-alarmists-said-would-soon-disappear-due-to-rising-sea-found-to-have-grown-in-size/?fbclid=IwAR1X99RSNuacjpTwsKs-1YnBVjwQpYPxwSOY_TYmM9G85-UTGG8uTbC71gY

It’s worth noting this is based on a Chinese study. As noted in Climate the Movie, these days most federally funded US research has to at least have a built in nod to “climate change,” if not making it a central tenet of the research.

Research that threatens to undermine “climate change” hysteria is not funded. I posted a piece yesterday noting that the amount of US R&D is falling. With China emerging as our primary geo-political foe, and as their research isn’t required to hobble itself by embedding ever more laughable climate hysteria into its foundation, one wonders what sort of impact that will have on geopolitics, and if that impact is seen by those championing “net zero” as a problem or a boon?

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1878
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18518
    • View Profile
Re: Pathological Science
« Reply #1238 on: April 07, 2024, 07:00:13 AM »
for some reason few people seem to remember a quake we had in NJ somewhere Circa 2011 - 2012

I don't recall the exact year though I recall where I was and vividly what I was thinking.

At first I questioned what it was, since never in my experience happened in Jersey thinking did a car hit the building then when it continued for ~ 20 to 40 seconds I realized it either had to be an earthquake or a mushroom cloud over NYC.  When I saw nothing outside I knew the truth.

This time I knew right away but for some reason most people don't remember the one from a dozen yrs ago.

Hear it is :

2011

https://whyy.org/articles/7-years-ago-5-8-magnitude-earthquake-rattled-the-jersey-shore/

it was centered in Va and 5.8 !

I also was in the medical school library on ~ 1982 in Grenada when we had a minor rumble.


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18518
    • View Profile
California water supplies
« Reply #1240 on: April 13, 2024, 10:52:36 AM »
Thanks to Climate Change ( :wink:)

all reservoirs are above historical averages:

https://cdec.water.ca.gov/cgi-progs/products/rescond.pdf

The Greens look like this =>  :-o :cry:

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18262
    • View Profile
Pathological Science , Illinois going under water, Lake Michigan overflowing?
« Reply #1241 on: April 13, 2024, 11:51:10 AM »
I don't even know how to make fun of them anymore.  Warming causes drought, Right?  Or excessive rains?  Which is it?

https://www.newsweek.com/map-lake-michigan-illinois-water-levels-rise-future-1889765

Now is this because the polar ice caps melting?

Wasn't it just a short time ago the Great Lakes were disappearing because of global warming, climate change?

How stupid do they think we are?  Don't answer that...