John Coleman’s TV Special Tonight – Global Warming: The Other Side

UPDATE: See

John Coleman’s hourlong news special “Global Warming – The Other Side” now online, all five parts here

Global Warming: The Other Side

Is civilization doomed because of man-made global warming? You’ve been told your carbon footprint could lead to skyrocketing temperatures, melting ice caps, dying polar bears and “superstorms.”

But there is another side to the story, and you can see it on KUSI this Thursday night.

KUSI meteorologist, John Coleman, has an amazing story to tell of science gone bad, and new revelations as the “climategate” scandal comes to the United States.

Join us on Thursday, January 14th, at 9pm, Pacific Time, for the special report that will explode the global warming myth!

http://www.kusi.com/weather/colemanscorner/81175327.html

I’m told there will also be internet video, and I’ll make it available here as soon as it is posted.

h/t to WUWT reader “Ray”

About these ads

67 thoughts on “John Coleman’s TV Special Tonight – Global Warming: The Other Side

  1. I’m in LA, and don’t think I get this channel. So that would be great if you do post the video. I’ll make sure to put it on my site.

    Thanks Watts Up With That? John Coleman, Lord Monckton and everyone else who isn’t letting this issue die like the politicians and media want.

    Why’s this so vitally important? Truth.

    If we can be lied to for years about “global warming” from so many, what else are we not being told? Ever since this climate scandal has broken out (though I’ve always been skeptical about this), I research and look even deeper at every issue politicians, the media, etc. make sound important. While I could tell from Gore’s refusal to debate and his hyperbolic “cities are going to sink in five years” talk that it was BS, I really had no idea how many people have been involved in promoting this BS with falsified info. I’m now fully aware.

    So thanks for keeping this issue going.

  2. It is becoming very difficult for the MSM to cater to the tree huggers and block inconvenient reports.

  3. That’s wonderful news! We don’t get that station here. I hope you will be able show it at WUWT.

  4. Looks interesting. I think the BBC will show this the day Hell freezes over (now that would be what I call climate change).

  5. I get that station and will be viewing the show tonight. Thanks to John Coleman and KUuuuuSI (those in San Diego will know why I wrote KUSI that way – John says it that way on his weather segment of the news) for continuing the good fight against the folly of AGW.

  6. I suspect that not much will be new to regular readers of WUWT or CA.
    However, the general public pretty much believes what comes out of the idiot box so getting it out to the public is a good thing. I look forward to viewing a Youtube of this piece.

  7. Durn,

    Ray beat me to it. Good on ya Ray.

    NASA Caught in Climate Data Manipulation; New Revelations Headlined on KUSI-TV Climate Special

    http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=30000

    Climate researchers have discovered that NASA researchers improperly manipulated data in order to claim 2005 as “THE WARMEST YEAR ON RECORD.” KUSI-TV meteorologist, Weather Channel founder, and iconic weatherman John Coleman will present these findings in a one-hour special airing on KUSI-TV on Jan.14 at 9 p.m. A related report will be made available on the Internet at 6 p.m. EST on January 14th at http://www.kusi.com.

  8. M. Simon (10:01:17) :

    Maybe I did but you certainly managed to find the details of what he will talk about…

    Since NASA-GISS has been “correcting” the data for urban island effect, they have been manipulating the data to suit their agenda. Let’s hope with Coleman’s special we will not only have one foot in the door, but our whole body of climate realism…

    “Global Warming, the other side” … global cooling?

  9. Should ABC, NBC, and CBS actually do investigative journalism and present full-throated “the other side” of the story programs, this Global Baloney would be toast.

    But I’m not holding my breath for the major broadcast companies to do the right thng.

    Why?

    Follow the money…

    At the same time their viewership is going down the drain.

    Maybe they should wake-up and smell the coffee.

  10. I think there has been a lot of pent-up frustration among many scientists and engineers with the religion of AGW. Now that the first chink has developed in the protective armor the flood gates are about to open. It’s just a ‘crying shame’ that a small group (cabal) of true believers has by ‘careful’ data selection and ‘questionable’ data analysis screwed up the science to the extent that if AGW happens to be true, the science to determine the extent of our damage to the climate has been set back tens of years.

  11. I’ve seen John Coleman interviewed before and he gets his points across really well and with just enough emotion to let you know he really believes strongly in what he is talking about, but without going to far.

    He comes across as a man you would trust. I hope loads of people who believe in AGW but have never really thought about it – just accepted it – watch this.

  12. I hope they ran their analysis by some other folks. The AGW attack dogs will be out in force to rip them apart – so let’s hope they have an ironclad analysis.

  13. Thank you, John Coleman, for having the courage to speak out.

    In addition to getting to the BOTTOM of this mess, can we also identify scoundrels at the TOP that poured our tax funds into fraud and purposeful deceit of the public?

    I understand that Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone, President of the National Academy of Sciences, is a climatologist. There is another person that might be able to answer the above question:

    I met Dr. Cicerone and Congressman Alan B. Mollohan, Chair of the Subcommittee on Appropriations for Science of the US House of Representatives on Thursday, 26 June 2008 at the NAS Building, 2101 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC.

    Again, thanks, John, for having the courage to speak out!

    With kind regards,
    Oliver K. Manuel
    Former NASA PI for Apollo

  14. I watched John Coleman religiously growing up in Chicago. He was on ABC, channel 7. Chicago has been lucky to have such excellent meteorologists like John Coleman & Tom Skilling who take their jobs very seriously and avoid being being political.

  15. Joe Crawford (10:36:50) :

    They have done far more damage than 10 yrs.
    It will take an army of thousands to go through printed media looking for the reported observations of the times to ascertain the data.
    In instances where the temperatures were not recorded in town newspapers, they are lost forever.
    30 years ago we had a great dataset.
    Today, we have a dataset disaster.
    Barbarians have struck.

  16. “Indiana Bones (10:24:03) :
    By the time the fourth wheel falls off – can we not expect the wagon to fall?”

    I have this cartoon image in my mind of a wild-west style “AGW” wagon with all 4 wheels missing. Supporting each corner are MSM characters huffing and puffing as they attempt to keep the wagon moving.

  17. Michele (09:09:53) : ‘If we can be lied to for years about “global warming” from so many, what else are we not being told?’

    1) The environment in the developed countries is improving, not degrading.

    2) Fossil fuels are still abundant and accessible.

    3) The Earth is not losing 40,000 (or 10,000, or even 1,000) species a year.

    4) “Yes we can” feed a growing population.

    5) Poverty, not development, is the true enemy of Gaia, and government bureaucracy is the enemy of development.

    6) Whatever a government “gives” to its people, it first has to take from its people. Whatever power it has to do “good” is also the power to do bad.

    That’s just off the top of my head. No doubt other WUWT readers can come up with even better lists.

  18. One of the nice things is that KUSI is an independent TV station in San Diego. So it can, and has, marched to the beat of it’s own drum. I grew up watching John Coleman’s Weather Forecasts. Unfortunately, since I relocated (albeit reluctantly) to the LA area, I won’t be able to watch his report live. I will be eagerly anticipating the weblink to the video.

    And all of you that watch this report, if you think he’s pretty old, you should see how he ends his forecast on Friday nights. “It’s FRIDAAAAYYYY!!!!!” he shouts and leaps up into the air spinning around and runs out of the studio. It’s great.

  19. James F. Evans (10:31:07) :
    Victory is not ours yet. See ‘Atomic Doomsday Clock’ here in WUWT…it seems conspiration began back in 1945…

  20. “I’m told there will also be internet video, and I’ll make it available here as soon as it is posted.”

    Thanks, Anthony. I don’t think KUSI gets out as far as I am from San Diego, and I just CAN’T miss this!

  21. John Coleman was a sort of zanie weatherman in chicago for about 20 years.
    He retired and went on to found “The Weather Channel”.
    Recently he has been very critical of The Weather Channel and meteorologist whose name escapes me; I thing it was Heidi Clem or something like that.
    Coleman no longer has a financial interest in the Weather Channel.
    I live in Wisconsin so I look forward to seeing this here at WUWT.

  22. Was excited to watch for a second. THen I realized it was on some random channel that I have never heard of. What is KUSI? I live in Canada and get many American networks but I’ve never even heard of that one. Dammit, everytime these type of programs are on, they end up on non mainstream channels.

    • Scott O
      2010/01/14 at 12:11pm

      “Was excited to watch for a second. THen I realized it was on some random channel that I have never heard of. What is KUSI? I live in Canada and get many American networks but I’ve never even heard of that one. Dammit, everytime these type of programs are on, they end up on non mainstream channels.”

      In American television broadcasting, any three or four letter call sign beginning with a K (west of the mississippi) or W (east) is licensed by the FCC and is a local tv or radio station that typically belongs to one of the major tv or radio networks, although there are independent stations, like KUSI, which serves the San Diego market. Independence is not necessarily a factor in judging its credibility. It is better to look a the company that owns the station and what they are about.

  23. “6) Whatever a government “gives” to its people, it first has to take from its people.” + admin. fees, processing fees, shipping & handling, insurance, palm greasing, etc.

  24. “Looks interesting. I think the BBC will show this the day Hell freezes over (now that would be what I call climate change).”

    Many people in England believe hell has frozen over given the snowy, thoroughly Canadian conditions now being inflicted on them under the guise of “global warming”

    I say, cue the BBC . . :)

  25. “Michele (09:09:53) : ‘If we can be lied to for years about “global warming” from so many, what else are we not being told?’”

    There’s a book about that and it’s The Skeptical Environmentalist by Björn Lomborg. He confronts data with the never-ending litany of the media. All aspects of it.

  26. “Global Warming, the other side” … global cooling?

    Now don’t start alarmism in the opposite direction. There’s no global anything going on except global stupidity. In the past 9000 years we haven’t seen anything outside the range of natural variability as we understand it. It gets warm in some places, cool in others, yet other places remain relatively static. The warms and cools move about with the oceans and jet streams. Even the sat temp series are averages, which is very misleading as to the temperature of each little region on the planet.

  27. Yeah looks interesting. Also interesting is the TV show I’m watching right now on National Geographic (in the UK) – they are talking of a coming ice age!

  28. Well, it looks like an early release of the press release has already happened. (That link to http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=30000 above)

    Guess I don’t need to post it now. Also, it includes a pointer to the pdf from Joseph D’Aleo over at Icecap:

    http://icecap.us/images/uploads/NOAAroleinclimategate.pdf

    I had put up a “teaser” to one of the graphs here:

    http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2010/01/13/ghcn-does-unadjusted-mean-cooked/

    Which shows the far past of Central Park being 3 F COLDER in the NOAA / NCDC GHCN “UN-adjusted” data than it is in the real raw data. Now just why you would want to put a 3 F slope toward warming in the present (via making the past 3 F colder) is a question of motivation; and I can’t speak to that, only to the data and what the data say.

    What the data say to me is that even the “UNadjusted” data are too “adjusted” to be trusted. We must step further up stream to get usable data and simply bypass NOAA if we are going to have any idea what our temperature history really has been. Otherwise we’re just stressing over 1/10 C “anomalies” in data with 3 F “un- adjustments”…

    So while you wait for the video, you can take a look at the report behind it.

    And once again WUWT is a bit ahead of the pack …

  29. ” Chris Clark (09:46:33) :
    Looks interesting. I think the BBC will show this the day Hell freezes over”

    …The BBC might show a program like this when all the old men who have been pumping out their hysterical “man-made global warming” lying propaganda since “The Weather Machine” in 1971 have finally died, after which their grandchildren will at last be able to know something about the truth from the British Brainwashing Corporation.

    Until then, forget it.

  30. I wonder how long it will be until Al Gore, and leading politicians will start travelling around the world (eating Caviar) and warn us about the coming man(n)-made Ice Age?

    One year?

  31. M. Simon (13:02:32) :

    I thing it was Heidi Clem

    Rumors are she changed her name:

    Heidi D. Cline

    Hilarious! Perhaps she is married to Michael Mann and it is all a huge misunderstanding.

  32. NYT: Insurance Group Says Stolen E-Mails Show Risk in Accepting Climate Science
    But Detlefsen’s letter says the “e-mails show that a close-knit group of the world’s most influential climate scientists actively colluded to subvert the peer-review process … manufactured pre-determined conclusions through the use of contrived analytic techniques; and discussed destroying data to avoid government freedom-of-information requests.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2010/01/13/13climatewire-insurance-group-says-stolen-e-mails-show-ris-91554.html

    Guardian: UN should be sidelined in future climate talks, says Obama official
    Pershing did not exclude the UN from future negotiations. But he repeatedly credited the group of leading economies headed by America for moving forward on the talks, including on finance and developing green technology..

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jan/14/climate-talks-un-sidelined

    naturally MSM has not been covering the following. guess if they did, it might encourage other interested parties to join in!

    Capital Press: Cattlemen fight EPA with ‘Climategate’
    A national beef group is invoking the so-called “Climategate” controversy as it challenges a recent U.S. government ruling on climate change…
    “We are taking a position that we do not believe the science with regard to alleged manmade climate change is there,” Thies said. “The EPA has a responsibility to conduct a rigorous scientific analysis and look at all the science out there instead of just cherry-picking certain studies that agree with its position about manmade climate change.”
    The cattle group points to Climategate, in which critics allege that e-mails stolen from Great Britain’s University of East Anglia show bias and manipulation of data by scientists on the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
    The fact that the EPA relied on some of the IPCC’s data to make its finding makes the ruling questionable, Thies said.

    http://www.capitalpress.com/lvstk/TH-beef-appeal-011510

  33. Kath (11:02:19) : “I have this cartoon image in my mind of a wild-west style “AGW” wagon with all 4 wheels missing. Supporting each corner are MSM characters huffing and puffing as they attempt to keep the wagon moving.”

    Nice image, but in fact WE are carrying the wagon, thanks to our tax dollars. The AGW wagon will stop only when (a) we run out of money (b) we get rid of the thieves, wreckers, liars, and cap & traitors that are spending us to disaster.

  34. OT but not entirely.

    Yesterday our beloved provincial government in Westminster debated “Climate Security”.

    see:- http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmhansrd/cm100113/debtext/100113-0014.htm#10011369000001

    I’m not expecting anyone to read all this (it prints on 44 pages of A4) but would just like to make the following points.

    You would go a long way to find a bunch of more complacent, self congratulatory, true believing AGW worshiper clowns than these.

    They bicker, scoring cheap political points about who might be most to blame for the highly tenuous state of the Country’s energy supplies (and the Government even tries to bluff their way past that).

    But my reason for posting this is to see how many elephants in the chamber readers here can spot, which NO-ONE mentions in the debate!

    I’ll start you off:-
    No mention of the ‘real’ government in Brussels that actually controls several aspects of Britains energy policy.

    No mention of Climategate

    No suggestion from anyone that it might be good to check out whether there is a connection between the extreme cold spell, the total lack of “Global Warming” and the fact that Corbyn and Bastardi can forecast weather but the £170 million a year MET office can’t get it right 24hrs ahead.

    No mention of the fact that their own regulator is now saying that the average domestic heating bill which has doubled to £1250 per year will increase to £5000 per year at the end of the decade and that 50% of the population will be in “fuel poverty”.

    No mention of the fact that Carbon Capture & Storage has NEVER been demonstrated on a large scale (and will achieve nothing anyway).

    No mention of the fact that (just like last winter’s freezing period), when demand was at its highest, Big Wind was generating nothing.

    Oh, wait. Simon Hughes, the Lib dem Spokesperson says (page 5, I think)

    “The Secretary of State confirmed that we have experienced the highest demand ever. That demand was met in the last week, as official reports confirm, from various sources, with 45 per cent. of our electricity output coming from coal, 37 per cent. from gas and 15 per cent. from nuclear, with a small proportion from wind. So Britain, thank goodness, has diversity of supply.”

    I really like the “small proportion from wind”. As he was quoting the other figures, can their be any doubt that he was well aware that the actual figure was 0.2 per cent? He must have known and so must many others there in the Chamber. How dishonest can you get? but the only real points made about Big Wind is that we need much more of it and lets criticise the other parties for not promoting it vigorously enough!

    There are several other hefty tuskers there in the Chamber. But I’ll leave it to other readers to point to them.

    And people got upset about expenses fiddles? Give me a machine gun…..

  35. This is wonderful. IPCC is a fraud, especially since new and much better science has now come to light. You can find it on google, by searching for
    A Really Inconvenient Truth, by Dan Miller. It’s almost an hour long, but you’ll learn just what those IPCC scientists are hiding from us!

  36. ALso interviewed on tonights program:

    In a new report, computer expert E. Michael Smith and Certified Consulting Meteorologist Joseph D’Aleo discovered extensive manipulation of the temperature data by the U.S. Government’s two primary climate centers: the National Climate Data Center (NCDC) in Ashville, North Carolina and the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) at Columbia University in New York City. Smith and D’Aleo accuse these centers of manipulating temperature data to give the appearance of warmer temperatures than actually occurred by trimming the number and location of weather observation stations. The report is available online at http://icecap.us/images/uploads/NOAAroleinclimategate.pdf.

    That would be WUWT regular E.M. Smith then.

    Go E.M.!!

  37. John Coleman is a corny, old-style weather forecaster here in San Diego who as noted above does all kinds of funny things with his voice to amuse his audience. That said, he’s also a visionary who started the The Weather Channel and is as tough as nails. That toughness will be on display tonight, I’m sure. He was among the first broadcast meteorologists to smell a rat on the subject of AGW.

    I will be watching.

  38. Now this really is chilling:

    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=121884

    Quoting from the article:

    President Obama’s regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein, argued the U.S. government should ban “conspiracy theorizing.” Among the beliefs Sunstein would ban is advocating that the theory of global warming is a deliberate fraud.

    “We can readily imagine a series of possible responses. (1) Government might ban conspiracy theorizing. (2) Government might impose some kind of tax, financial or otherwise, on those who disseminate such theories.”

    Sunstein said government agents “might enter chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine percolating conspiracy theories by raising doubts about their factual premises, causal logic or implications for political action.”

    Wow!

  39. Martin Brumby (13:27:55)

    I think most [possibly all] of the UK coal powered stations are due to be decommissioned in about 5 years. Also all the UK nuclear power stations are operating past their expected lifetimes. This means that in 5 years we could have lost 60% of our generating capacity. There are no plans to build new coal fired stations, and although a new nuclear program is touted I am not even sure if it off the starting block, and anyway – you don’t build them overnight.

    Most of this will be down to the madness of King Gordon, who would rather see Britain destroyed than contemplate a viable energy policy which may offend his AGW beliefs.

    Even the £100 billion wind farm initiative is unlikely to have much in place by that time, and as you point out – how effective will it be anyway.

  40. I’m told there will also be internet video, and I’ll make it available here as soon as it is posted.

    THANK YOU!

    I don’t know how long global warming can last in America with these tv shows coming out (finally!) recently.

  41. It’s 9.40am Friday where I am and you guys still haven’t reached 9pm Thursday. *sigh* HURRY UP! I want to see the webcast! :P

  42. Mariss (14:48:04) :

    Now this really is chilling:

    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=121884

    Quoting from the article:

    President Obama’s regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein, argued the U.S. government should ban “conspiracy theorizing.” Among the beliefs Sunstein would ban is advocating that the theory of global warming is a deliberate fraud.

    Thoughtcrime!

    Will we still be allowed to think Sunstein needs a good kicking for his 198FOrwellian doublespeak?

  43. Re: Martin Brumby (Jan 14 13:27),

    Last week I sent the following letter to the editor of DT:-

    “Sir,

    Whilst we are all greatly indebted to The Daily Telegraph for the excellent investigatory journalism that resulted in the exposure of the disgraceful state of affairs regarding our MP’s expenses, is it not now the time to assign your intrepid journalists to the investigation of the potential scientific/political fraud that is Anthropogenic Global Warming?

    Would not MP’s being allowed to base Cap and Trade policies on unsound science represent a far greater misappropriation of public funds rendering their expenses misdemeanours a total irrelevance?

    Or is it The Daily Telegraph’s stance that the “science is settled”?”

    Didn’t see it in the letters column, but am I surprised? Bags second with your machine gun!

  44. James Sexton (12:01:27) :”You mean they lied???? How can this be? There is/was a consensus!!!!!”

    Sad but true, The Team has been putting the “con” in “consensus” for 150 years. They’ve also taken the science out of conscience.

    (Note: I was able to extend the record back 150 years by stitching the snake-oil-salesmen and eugenics proxies to actual measurements taken of The Team)

  45. Re: Anticlimactic (Jan 14 16:17),

    Thanks Anticlimatic,

    Yes, know all about Booker, Heffer, Warner, Delingpole etc. All of which are allowed to make their own comment.

    But what about the real investigating journalism, is it dead at the DT? The MP’s expenses “scoop” was because the whistleblower brought it to them. Not a lot of investigating needed there! The DT’s public service came to the fore showing that there has been a serious misappropriation of public funds.

    Now there is another story in town, which if proved to be correct, is of such a scale that makes the MP’s expenses “scandalous misappropriation of funds” look like a non event.

    The scoop (whistleblower) went elsewhere (and correctly to the people who had with integrity who chased down this nonsense) this time. So what do we get from the champion of “the misappropriation of public funds” comments from individuals, who I do greatly admire!

    But where are the editorials? At least questioning that in the light of the CRU emails “should not somebody be at least doing some due diligence?”

    Or is it the stance of the DT that the “science is settled?

  46. Mariss:

    I just printed Cass Sunstein’s article from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1084585 and am going to read it carefully tonight.

    Here’s a particularly interesting quote from Sunstein’s paper:

    “We suggest a distinctive tactic for breaking up the hard core of extremists who supply conspiracy theories: cognitive infiltration of extremist groups, whereby government agents or their allies (acting either virtually or in real space, and either openly or anonymously) will undermine the crippled epistemology of believers by planting doubts about the theories and stylized facts that circulate within such groups, thereby introducing beneficial cognitive diversity.”

    Now, this is a real hoot, when you think about it. Two questions come to mind:

    Question #1: “Who is it in the global warming controversy that constitutes the ‘hard core of extremists,’ and who suffer from a ‘crippled epistemology?’”

    OK, now that the answer to that question is obvious, here’s question #2: “who has been doing the best work ‘introducing beneficial cognitive diversity’ into the minds of that hard core of extremists and their zillions of gullible followers?”

    If the answer isn’t clear, I’ll spell it out:

    C-O-N-T-R-I-B-U-T-O-R-S T-O W-A-T-T-’-S U-P !!!!

    Thank you everyone, for helping preserve the 1st amendment!

    Ken in North Dakota

  47. E.M. Smith wrote;
    What the data say to me is that even the “UNadjusted” data are too “adjusted” to be trusted.

    Too adjusted to be trusted… there’s a Dr. Seuss style rhyme story just dying to be written. ;)

    Perhaps that’s what’s needed to get the point across to some people who still believe everything Algore and the Hockey Team say?

  48. Mariss, Others:

    I finished the first half of Cass Sunstein’s original article, in which he discusses the mechanisms that shape the epistemologies of conspiratorial-minded groups. The second half is devoted mostly to his ideas about government policy–I doubt I’ll find much to admire there. But there are some brilliant observations on pages 12 and 13 that do a pretty good job explaining the dynamics at work within a conspiratorially-minded group known to readers of this site as the “hockey team.” Here is a sample. I’ve deleted the footnote markers.

    6. Group polarization occurs for reasons that parallel the mechanisms that produce cascades. Informational influences play a large role. In any group with some initial inclination, the views of most people in the group will inevitably be skewed in the direction of that inclination. As a result of hearing the various arguments, social interactions will lead people toward a more extreme point in line with what group members initially believed. Reputational factors matter as well. People usually want to be perceived favorably by other group members. Once they hear what others believe, some will adjust their positions at least slightly in the direction of the dominant position. For purposes of understanding the spread of conspiracy theories, it is especially important to note that group polarization is particularly likely, and particularly pronounced, when people have a shared sense of identity and are connected by bonds of solidarity. These are circumstances in which arguments by outsiders, unconnected with the group, will lack much credibility, and fail to have much of an effect in reducing polarization.

    7. Selection effects. A crippled epistemology can arise not only from informational and reputational dynamics within a given group, but also from self-selection of members into and out of groups with extreme views. Once polarization occurs or cascades arise, and the group’s median view begins to move in a certain direction, doubters and halfway believers will tend to depart while intense believers remain. The overall size of the group may shrink, but the group may also pick up new believers who are even more committed, and in any event the remaining members will, by self-selection, display more fanaticism. Group members may engage in a kind of double-think, segregating themselves, in a physical or informational sense, in order to protect their beliefs from challenge by outsiders. Even if the rank and file cannot coherently do this, group leaders may enforce segregation in order to insulate the rank and file from information or arguments that would undermine the leaders’ hold on the group.

    Members of informationally and socially isolated groups tend to display a kind of paranoid cognition and become increasingly distrustful or suspicious of the motives of others or of the larger society, falling into a “sinister attribution error.” This error occurs when people feel that they are under pervasive scrutiny, and hence they attribute personalistic motives to outsiders and overestimate the amount of attention they receive. Benign actions that happen to disadvantage the group are taken as purposeful plots, intended to harm. Although these conditions resemble individual-level pathologies, they arise from the social and informational structure of the group, especially those operating in enclosed or closely knit networks, and are not usefully understood as a form of mental illness.

    It seems to me this sheds some light on the machinations of Michael Mann and his inner circle, whose actions would seem to place them (and not their critics) as funcional conspiracists. I have a feeling Steve McIntyre would find Sunstein’s analysis quite relevant.

    The whole paper (30 pages) can be downloaded in pdf format from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1084585

    Thanks Everybody for your Comments.

    Ken in North Dakota

  49. mike roddy (13:45:20) :

    This is wonderful. IPCC is a fraud, especially since new and much better science has now come to light. You can find it on google, by searching for
    A Really Inconvenient Truth, by Dan Miller. It’s almost an hour long, but you’ll learn just what those IPCC scientists are hiding from us!

    So the IPCC are being really, really optimistic, and the middle of the bell curve, ie most probable scenario, is catastrophe of ‘biblical’ proportions?

    And ice ages are caused by a tiny bit of cooling, and then a massive and unstoppable ‘feedback’ of CO2 loss causes 4 miles of ice over New York?

    As satire, it’s pretty good, I must say!

    Oh….. you mean it’s not supposed to be funny?

  50. @Anticlimactic (15:25:41) :

    Yes, the Large Combustion Plant Directive (from the Real government in Brussels) will mean that virtually all the coal fired power station will have to be shut down by 2015. But the 2015 date is based on them just picking up odd peak demand rather than generating at base load. So when the stations are ‘showing what they can do’ (as they have been doing for the last month) then that 2015 date comes forward.

    Expect to see them starting to be shut down early 2012 unless there is a change in policy. But from which political party???

    No one has remarked, so far as I can see, that investment in new clean coal power stations using technology developed in Grimethorpe (near Barnsley) in the late ’70s and ’80s would get around twice as much electricity out of a tonne of coal as the old workhorses that are keeping the lights on at present. And with lower emissions. Just a tad more attractive that another £100 Billion worth of wind turbines!

    Maggie Thatcher & John Major shut Grimethorpe down and many of the boffins went to America and got involved in designing the most efficient coal burning power stations now operating in the US.

    But the government here says there is no future for coal in the UK without Carbon Sequestration. This, of course, will effectively halve the efficiency and has never been demonstrated on a large scale. People working in the industry aren’t expecting to see a real plant working for 10 years.

    You couldn’t make it up.

  51. Martin Brumby (00:20:36)

    When either the power stops coming to keep the cold out, and/or the price of it doubles or triples, there will be a change. A big change.

    It is only a matter of time. The exposure herein will make the change sooner and easier.

Comments are closed.