Dem Lawmaker Gets Pushback After Asking YouTube To Stop Spreading Climate Skepticism

From The Daily Caller

Daily Caller News Foundation logo

Chris White Tech Reporter

January 30, 2020 12:42 PM ET

Democratic Florida Rep. Kathy Castor is getting pushback from climate skeptics after she asked Google on Monday to nix content on YouTube that takes a skeptical approach to United Nations’ climate models.

Castor asked CEO Sundar Pichai in a Jan. 27 letter not to incentivize “climate misinformation content on its platform.” She made the request after a Jan. 16 report from a nonprofit group suggested it found examples where YouTube’s algorithms promoted so-called climate denialism.

“Stop promoting climate denial and climate disinformation videos by removing them immediately from the platform’s recommendation algorithm,” the Florida Democrat wrote in a list of suggestions to Pichai.

Castor also asked the CEO to stop “monetizing” such content.

The report, published by AVAAZ, hits several pieces of content, including a 2018 Fox News interview with climate scientist Patrick Michaels, who explained why 31 of 32 climate models are “fudged” by design. Michaels worked as a senior fellow in environmental studies at the Cato Institute until 2019.

AVAAZ argued this claim, and one he made suggesting only half of global warming might be caused by human activity, contained misinformation. (RELATED: Exclusive: Facebook Removed False Label After Scientists Said Climate ‘Alarmist’ Fact Checkers Are Targeting Them)

Watch:

“Half of the warming since 1976 is plausible and in line with the IPCC which says ‘more than half the warming since mid-century,’” Michaels told the Daily Caller News Foundation in defense of his claims.

He was referencing data from the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

He added: “That’s post 1950 but there was no warming from 50 through 75. All the warming is post 1975 and the U.N. statement accommodates 51% which sure looks like a half.”

Other climate skeptics are also weighing in on Castor’s request, as well as the report that prompted the congresswoman’s letter.

Michaels experienced a similar incident in September 2019, when Facebook deemed claims he and another scientist made in a Washington Examiner editorial false. The tech company eventually removed the label after Michaels argued their points in a letter to CEO Mark Zuckerberg.

Facebook exempted opinion content and political advocacy organizations from the social media giant’s independent fact-checking efforts in October of that year after the DCNF’s report highlighting Michaels’s complaints.

“Instead of engaging in open debate with climate skeptics, Rep. Castor just wants to shut us up. I can only imagine what her side would do to us if they had real power,” JunkScience founder Steve Milloy told The Washington Times on Wednesday, two days after Castor sent her letter.

Climate Depot founder Marc Morano accused the Democrat of trying to silence skeptics.

“Sadly, I expect YouTube to cave and continue its policies of clamping down on climate skeptics and those who oppose so-called solutions like the Green New Deal or U.N. Paris climate pact,” he told The Washington Times. “YouTube has already initiated policies that amount to climate ‘virtue signaling’ with their disclaimers.”

Castor has not responded to the DCNF’s request for comment.

“We can’t speak to Avaaz’s methodology or results, and our recommendations systems are not designed to filter or demote videos or channels based on specific perspectives,” a YouTube representative said in a statement addressing AVAAZ’s report.

85 thoughts on “Dem Lawmaker Gets Pushback After Asking YouTube To Stop Spreading Climate Skepticism

  1. Agree with me or I will take away your right to freedom of speech. Where in the Constitution can you find that? Another Democrat promoting their alternative democracy.

    • They would normally deny democracy through judicial overrides, alleging diversity (e.g. racism), but they are losing ground. So, what remains is activism and em-pathetic appeals.

    • I will defend your right to say whatever you want. Unless I happen to disagree with what you say, then you are going to jail.

  2. This is a classic case where people should vote with their feet, that is, leave the offending site, like move to Florida from New York, or to Texas from Kalifornia.

    • The marxists are doing just that — after ruining their own states have been/continue moving to low-tax states from NY/CA/MA, etc and bringing their poisonous ideals & hatred to those states.

        • Unfortunately Oregon is to close to California and one of the first states they fled to. Now these immigrant Californians have turned Oregon into a mini California which likes to compete for top prize in wackiness and corruption. Sad part is there are 6 of 36 counties who reliably vote blue and rule the state with that vote.

          • And they also converted The Oregonian, which when I was in high school was reliably conservative, into a local edition of the Washington Post. They are even blatant about it, in the e-edition they have articles and opinion from the Washington Post amounting to about 10% of the paper.

  3. Vote her out. If she can not uphold the constitution she has no business being a representative of the people.

  4. Congressional Democrats openly advocating clamping down on free speech, just like real fascists would.

    • Bingo.

      But by socialist standards, the notion that leftists are fascists is part of a “right wing conspiracy”. Consider, however, that from the standpoint of a communist, everything IS to the right of your point of view – even those irritating fascists who communists (and their useul idiots) are constantly railing against. On the objective scale, however, communism and fascism are merely sister (leftist) socialist ideologies. The latter is merely the pragmatic communisist’s preferred brand, recognizing that (1) the entrenched classical liberal political economy (and all of its pesky private ownership) has to be contended with, and (2) the 20th centiry’s unbroken track record of failure when implementing pure communism. Rather than nationalize all industry, which, as things turn out, tends to cause a bit of a stink, the fascist settles for dictating what the CEO can and can’t do. Along the way, we get blanket propaganda and novel moral concerns and sources of fear to coax folks into sacrificing for the state. The fascist aims pulls the strings of business while the communist tries to own them and the marrionette outright. That Democrat, and many more of them, are actual fascists. And you’d all be total fools to pretend that isn’t so.

      • Fascism is a social phenomenon and an ideology of governance. Fascism doesn’t exist the level of the individual, only hankering after it. Try being a fascist with your neighbours and see what happens.

        Communism is similarly a social phenomenon and an ideology of governance. In theory one might act as a communist (economically) but that’s about all.

        Democracy is a social phenomenon and an ideology of governance. It can be practiced by the individual in their daily lives because essentially it is a form of consultation with benefits. The circle can be expanded from the family to the whole planet in small steps.

        There is a dearth of education about language, politics and consultation. Thats why we have ignorant guesses substituted for informed conceptual analysis. Our golden age is yet to come.

        • Democracy is an interesting study. Many people perhaps most people believe that the US is a democracy. It is not. Nor is the UK and neither are Australia, Canada, New Zealand etc. All have aspects of democracy, but they are blended with elements of socialism – mostly the good bits such as nationalised health care. As badly done as it is, it does actually sort of work and it’s not all bad. We all like the thought of democracy and we all have an impression of what we think it is. Most of us would struggle if we lived in a true democracy. How it seems to work is when decisions are made that we agree with we applaud democracy. When decisions are made that we disagree with, we cry foul and accuse the decision makers of being Marxists or Fascists or Socialists or maybe just plain incompetent. Interesting how democracy is perceived. The official name of North Korea is the “Democratic People’s Republic of Korea” and the political left party in the US is called the “Democrat” party. All is not what it seems.

          • Pete: agreed, for the most part. People believe the u.s. is as democracy. It isn’t. It’s a Republic that has, for decades, perhaps more than a century, been a modern mercantalist state. Corporatist or crony capitalist. The entire Biden family is a perfect microcosm of that. There’s plenty of mud in both parties, to be fair.

            The push from voters should be for mass transparency. There’s no excuse for no transparency anymore, given how cheap it is to transmit information. At the same time, have to shed legacy media and the social media giants who are striving to assume their mantle. The real ‘opioid of the masses’ are your nightly news castors and the social media execs who favour censorship.

        • Fascism is at root a social phenomenon. The fascist political philosphers of the early 20th wrote about how it as exactly a social phenomenon. They described it that way because it was designed that way. A fascist embodies the state. The individual becomes the state. One and the same in interest, will, and action. If it sounds like something else, well, you’re right. It does. That’s because the fascist writers were all disillusioned ex Communists and ex Marxists. Totalitarianism was counted as a feature of the ideology, not a bug. Individuals were supposed to think of themselves as the cells of the body of the state. They could settle for permitting private ownership, provided the orders for quotas, prices, and distribution came from the the state. Turns out, if you own a big company, obtaining a state imposed monopoly in your market is A-OK with you. Being part of that totalitarian in-crowd dues have its perks. 70 years of smoke, mirrors, and other sorts of obfuscation has wiped out any real education about the topic you’ll find in your average history class, as you alluded to. Would Bernie Sanders look nearly as appetizing as he apparently does if three generations of Americans had grown up realizing his ideological forefathers exterminated 10s of millions of people? I’m gonna guess no.

          Democracy should be feared, because democracy can give you exactly nazism, communism, fascism, and just about anything else under the sun. Democracy can give you mob rule. The founders knew this exactly, and designed a Republic instead. They understood human nature, and so they designed the system of government to be paralyzingly antagonistic to itself. “Let the social engineers and autocratic types fight amongst themselves to the point that they achieve very little of their aims, and leave the rest of us to sort ourselves out” was what they tried to pull off.

      • It is unfortunate that the historical accident of radicals occupying the left side of the French Assembly after the Revolution of 1789 forever cast our minds into a left-right focus for liberalism to conservatism.

        Most totalitarian governments we think of as fascist, including the Italian Fascists under Mussolini and the Nazis under Hitler had socialist roots. They were socialists. Their roots, although originally in social democracy, involved semi militaristic cradle-to-grave benefit and belief systems from the start. The Nazis and Italian Fascists simply took over the organizational levers that the social democrats invented and scrubbed whatever humanity the founding parties had made room for. “Nazi” is short for National Socialist German Workers Party. They didn’t exactly obsess over preserving individual rights. The rich elites loved them until the party eventually devoured them too. Wealthy German industrialists and plutocrats poured money into the party when it openly rejected democratic and internationalist principles. The Italian Fascists, firm totalitarians like the Nazis, took up the trappings of their social democratic predecessors, all the necessary adjustments being made

        So the operative terms here are totalitarianism versus individual liberty, and the free market versus a planned economy. Forget left-right. Keep your eye on who is suppressing whom.

    • Fascists are just another flavor of socialism. The defining point of fascism rather than vanilla socialism, based on Jonah Goldberg’s book Liberal Fascism, is a charismatic leader. The great fascists of the world in the 20th century were Franco, Mussolini, Hitler, and Peron. They were all top-down controllers of society and the economy, with nominal private property rights but no real rights. In this they were no different than the other socialist/communist regimes of their day. The state was everything. However, the leaders themselves were revered and worshipped. They were also able to whip a crowd into a frenzy at a rally. We use the term “fascist” over socialist or communist because it is associated with Adolf Hitler, and his evil. Mussolini was a greater fascist in my opinion, but not as despicable. Other communists killed more people (Stalin, Mao) or a greater percentage of their people (Pol Pot), but Hitler gets the worst rap.

      Obama at his first inauguration is the closest the United States of America has come to a president that can make women faint.

      • Mussolini was an early fascist, if he did not actually invent it. He was a Marxist socialist before he became a fascist. Giovani Gentile was another early writer about fascism. Fascism is communism light. Yet its murder counts still break the 10 million mark. When your pitch to a democracy is the scientific management of society, turns out you get a lot of big narcissistic personalities who think they have the best plan. Then it turns out that the most sociopathic of those folks have what it takes to climb their way to the top of the party ranks, because it takes a ruthless sociopath to squash all of their rivals, their rival master plans, and then to squash anyone else who survives to become your new rival after your own plan fails miserably.

      • Minor point but my understanding of Goldberg’s distinction between Fascism and Communism was the replacement of internationalism with nationalism.
        Mussolini became disillusioned with class consciousness during his stint in WWI and saw nationalism as the greater motivating force.

  5. Kathy Castor, lawyer. Graduated 1988 from Emory university with BA in political science.
    One of the most partisan politicians in congress.

    Zero science background. That means zero science credibility.

  6. There’s plenty of real flat-earthers and moon-hoaxers on YouTube, but this is too much for her? Amazing.

    Unsurprisingly, she’s pretty out of touch with reality and should be more worried about other, more direct, things. While it’s difficult for one individual to gauge precisely, I would say that her Party gets its ass kicked by Trump supporters on YouTube, despite the open political bias of such companies.

  7. “Climate Skepticism” Ain’t skepticism one of the qualities of a good scientist?
    I’m an old fart with business management and logistics management degrees and experience. In High School I thought I was going to be the next great researcher in chemistry…..then organic chem and higher level math intervened. In my Masters Program one of the best classes I had was one I now title “The Science of Science”, basically a overview on how to understand and supervise the world and the work of researchers and engineers….scientific method etc.
    Most memorable quote from Prof: “You must expect your scientists to be skeptics….especially about their own work.”

    • “You must expect your scientists to be skeptics….especially about their own work.

      To be critical to your own work is a difficult and hard discipline. Just as hard as having an open ear to other’s critique of your work. How come Michael Mann crosses my mind?

      • No idea. Mann isn’t a scientist as you describe. He’s one of they “consensual scientists”, who get paid to prove a pre determined outcome they agree between themselves so they never have to prove it, because they can’t. Pretty much Feynman’s pseudo scientist using the vague theory approach to science to avoid proof.

        And the rewards are so much easier if you prove political science instead of testing it, you can be a crap scientist and still get paid and published, and your sponsors can also fire anyone employed in academe who actually tests your assertions.

        With reproducibility no longer a requirement of published science, consensual sciences such as climate are go to careers for the less able and work shy spawn of the American middle classes, independent validation is effectively banned by PALS reviw, so publish and never be damned.

  8. If you want to know how biased the Google algorithms already are – try looking for climatechangedispatch.com.

    If you type in “climate change dispatch'” you will be presented with pages of redirect, alarmism and denouncements.

    You will go through three pages before you stumble across Jo-Ann Nova’s site – three and a half pages before your first “hit” on a skeptical site.

    Even if you type in “climatechangedispatch.com” it will appear after the headliner which is a Wikipedia denunciation of the site.

    How much more restricted would Kathy Castor like it ?

    If you don’t like censored algorithms or search tracking algorithms use DuckDuckGo

    https://duckduckgo.com/spread

    • “How much more restricted would Kathy Castor like it ?”

      She wants to make it so such sites can’t be found at all. If she had her way the government would take direct action and shut down any site that she disagrees with.

    • The automated parts of the algorithms are more correct then you think. The problem comes from human curated tables. The algorithms themselves are quite objective while the curated tables are highly subjective as they override the more objective results based on linkages, hits and activity.

      The most nefarious bias is to assign sites a ‘trustworthiness’ metric where skeptic sites are pushed down while alarmist sites are pushed up.

      I suggest doing a search related to climate and then hit the ‘send feedback’ link at the bottom of the page to complain about the bias. If enough people do this, maybe they’ll get a clue.

    • I carefully typed in all three words, separated by spaces in the Google search line. Climatechangedispatch.com was the second link on the page, with total hits at 16,000,000.

      • Daniel, I cut and pasted that from something I wrote a few months back (that was the result I got at the time and wrote to Climate Change Dispatch about it). So I repeated your search (something I should have done before posting) and indeed I got the same result as you did.
        Hallelujah brother – something has changed.
        Memo to self – check current facts before posting.
        Thank you for your input – but I assure you it was true at the time of writing.

      • I carefully typed in all three words, separated by spaces in the Google search line. Climatechangedispatch.com was the second link on the page, with total hits at 16,000,000.

        I did the same and climatechangedispatch.com was first with the Heartland Institute second. Only then came a few debunking sites.

    • ken: exactly. Social media giants want to replace legacy media but not the role of legacy media. Antitrust dismembering should be on the table.

    • I seen the effect of google’s bias while I was watching with interest how a thread developed in the “off topic” section of non related online forum. The thread was about the wildfires in Australia and if they were caused by global warming or not, and somebody (not me) linked to Roy Spencer’s Global Warming 101 page. Then the denouncements of Dr. Spencer started rolling in. Where did these people get these misrepresentations of Spencer and his work? From google of course.

  9. From the article: “Castor asked CEO Sundar Pichai in a Jan. 27 letter not to incentivize “climate misinformation content on its platform.”

    Now we need to know the definition of “climate misinformation.

    I know what my definiton is: Climate misinformation is anything that attributes Earth’s current climate to human causes.

    • “I know what my definition is: Climate misinformation is anything that attributes Earth’s current climate to human causes.”

      Mine too – but I think maybe it needs a more descriptive term. Maybe “Dangerous, delusional climate misinformation and propaganda.”

  10. It is very unfortunate and unhelpful that ignorance of the utility and limitations of computer-generated models of complex (non-linear(?), chaotic(?)) physical systems is prevalent.

  11. [I am uncomfortable approving foreign language. How do the others feel? Mod]

    Sent this to “deutschland radio”. Being a “climate denier” they destroy my emails without reading. In fear of getting rebuked their fake news.

    Topic: Wanted: the contrail killer
    Bio-kerosene is far from climate neutral
    ____________________________________

    16:35 Uhr

    Forschung aktuell aufnehmen

    Bakterienkur für Bienen
    Strategie gegen Varroa-Milbe erfolgreich

    Gesucht: Der Kondensstreifen-Killer
    Bio-Kerosin ist längst nicht klimaneutral

    Zoonosen
    Wann springt ein Virus vom Tier auf den Mensch?
    Interview Fabian Leendertz, Robert-Koch-Institut

    Wissenschaftsmeldungen

    Sternzeit 31. Januar 2020
    Der Sternenhimmel im Februar

    Am Mikrofon: Christiane Knoll

    Wieder mal sehr kurz gedacht:

    – Wolkenbildung während der Nacht hält Bodenfrost zurück – üblicherweise scheint in der Nacht keine Sonne. 

    – Wolkenbildung während des Tages verteilt Sonneneinstrahlung über der Wolkengrenze und schickt damit Sonnenenergie  teilweise wieder in den Weltraum zurück. 

    – Frau Holle schüttelt die Betten aus heisst: Es mag schneien, muss aber nicht frostig werden. 

    ____________________________________

    Sehr seltsam, eure “Experten” 

    ____________________________________
    ____________________________________

    16:35 Uhr

    Current research

    Bacteria treatment for bees
    Strategy against Varroa mite successful

    Wanted: the contrail killer
    Bio-kerosene is far from climate neutral

    zoonoses
    When does a virus jump from animals to humans?
    Interview with Fabian Leendertz, Robert Koch Institute

    Science News

    Sidereal time January 31, 2020
    The starry sky in February

    On the microphone: Christiane Knoll

    ____________________________________

    Again thought very briefly:

    – Cloud formation during the night retains ground frost – usually no sun shines at night.

    – Cloud formation during the day distributes solar radiation above the cloud boundary and thus partly sends solar energy back into space.

    – Ms. Holle shakes feathers out of the beds: It may snow, but that mustn’t bring frost.

    ____________________________________

    Very strange, your “experts”

    https://www.deutschlandfunk.de/forschung-aktuell.675.de.html

  12. A President Sanders would sign Executive Orders that would in essence compel YouTube to implement Representative Castor’s “demands”. Threats of regulation and loss of government contracts and influence would work the trick.

    • A unending series of lawsuits would also do the trick, and is the more likely course. This type of lawfare can be very expensive.

    • The enforcement of new-speak and correct-think by the large social media corporations is one of the most important problems that needs to be addressed by government today. It isn’t government that is threatening free speech in the US, but increasingly dominant private monopolies who get a legal pass under current law.

      And woke financial monopolists are joining in too. If you become known to the SPLC or ADL for holding opinions they don’t like, then watch out. Mastercard out-sources their political witch-finding to such activist “charities”. In an increasingly cashless world try running a business, renting a car, or buying a plane ticket when payment processing companies refuse to do business with you because of your political views. Views which may have been considered mainstream only one or two decades ago. If you are suddenly deprived of a mechanism to even pay your lawyer then you effectively no longer exist.

      It may currently work in the Democrat’s favor but there will likely come a time when it doesn’t. They need to get together with people across the aisle before it’s too late or else they may find themselves harking back to the golden years of Donald Trump.

  13. This is how we win.

    If there is one thing large corporations hate, it is government interference. So far, Google (the owner of YouTube) has been quite sympathetic to the Alarmist cause. Attempts to control them like this will change that.

    • Unfortunately large corporations only hate it when government targets them directly.
      They love it when government creates expensive regulations that hinder an entire section of the economy. They have the resources to deal with such regulations. Their smaller competitors do not.

  14. Mr Hart –

    Brilliantly put. A private industry Social Credit System that accomplishes the aims of some in government who are constrained by The Constitution from doing so themselves, like Rep. Castor.

  15. “YouTube has already initiated policies that amount to climate ‘virtue signaling’ with their disclaimers.”

    When the evidence and apologies don’t stand up to scrutiny… These disclaimers seemed odd, extremely selective, and directed users to Wikipedia as a subject matter expert.

  16. Every new day brings more information that makes me feel I’m witnessing the end of the United States. These people are nothing if not patient: 30 years of climate alarmism, climaxing in the last year with an unprecedented wave of utter bonzo hysteria from Prince Charles’s 18 months to UN and European leaders kowtowing to a mentally ill teen. And let’s please not forget who kicked it off: a failed Democrat Presidential candidate.

    They got the postmodern agenda into the Universities (and it’s worth noting that the founders of postmodernism, Jacques Derrida and Michel Foucault, were vocal proponents of the decriminalization of pedophilia) and even the public schools, and are constantly attacking the Constitution as the obstacle to one-party tyranny it was intended to be. Yuri Bezmenov saw all this coming decades ago, and said that complete demoralization had already been established for 25 years at the time of his interview in (appropriately) 1984. Every single aspect of the democratic platform is now based on hard-left activism. It’s no longer just old cradle Communists like Bernie Sanders now – these people were in college wearing black balaclavas and beating the crap out of conservative students just a few years ago. And if there weren’t, they were cheering them on, as happened after the Berkeley Antifa riot.

    Folks better wake up – they have their own Brownshirts now and aren’t afraid to use them. Time for adults to get serious about this. They certainly are: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/jan/21/guillotine-rich-project-veritas-exposes-another-ra/

    • The socialists have convinced a depressingly large percentage of the population that nobody deserves to be wealthy and that it’s OK to take most of the wealth from the wealthy, after all, they’ll still have more than you do.

      Socialists actually believe that taking money from those who earned it and giving it to them will create a perfect society.

      • It’s not the wealthy they’re after, who in reality have the wherewithal to remove themselves and their assets from the country that chooses to levy draconian measures against them. The Caymans, Switzerland, Belize, and many others will be more than happy to welcome them as new citizens. That old trope is just a smokescreen they use to make losers want to vote for them, although it’s always possible they’ll simply enact laws to prevent the wealthy from taking their money offshore with them.

        No: it’s everyone in the middle they want to punish. Marxism-Leninism has always gone first after the dissident intellectuals, then the “bourgeoisie.” For our present purposes we can use the term “deplorables.” Deplorables are neither a member of their class (you note people like Mr. Obam and Mrs. Clinton are not exactly of the working class) nor of the “oppressed” (meaning leftist non-producer) class, so they’re despised.

        They’ve never been very good at hiding their contempt, but when the GOP ran a candidate who spoke for the really badly off like Rust Belt families, and promised to repatriate America’s manufacturing base and claw a bit back from the Peoples Republic of You Owe Us a Trillion Dollars, they and their media water carriers went literally off the rails – and the rest is history. You can find articles all over the web claiming that the success of the trade war and the prevention of the PRC’s currency becoming the world standard is a BAD thing. Welcome to the world turned upside down.

        They don’t want a perfect society, either; the average leftist voter might believe that, but I think it’s now appallingly clear that they want what every leftist revolution has always wanted: permanent control of the country. Everything they purport to believe in is only a means to that end. They don’t have principles; they have tactics. Heck, I just randomly found a January 20 article by an “expert” insisting that Mr. Trump has all the hallmarks of someone preparing to commit genocide.

        Given the Dems’ tendency to accuse others of the things they’re doing, in conjunction with the environmental movement’s desire to see humanity annihilated (http://green-agenda.com/), I find that more than a bit terrifying.

  17. Not related to You Tube, but isn’t it about time we object to this falsehood, which comes up when you google WUWT:

    Watts Up With That? is a blog promoting climate change denial that was created by Anthony Watts in 2006.

    • I’ve repeatedly reedited it to no avail. They slander Michael Crichton over State of Fear, too. Made me realize the claim of no bias was an enormous pile of horse crap.

  18. One group of people asking (demanding?) that a company vindictively demonetises another’s entirely legitimate revenue streams purely because they don’t like what others are doing is tantamount to unlawful activity.

    If they haven’t convinced enough people to follow their view it’s because they haven’t done a good-enough job of explaining or proving their case. The ‘Democrats’ should be ashamed of themselves.

  19. If disinformation about climate change was removed or censored on social media or the media in general the alarmist would have no voice.

  20. I’m a climate catastrophe denier (may as well use the current term), and my take on climate change catastrophe nondeniers (Hah! Take that!) is that they’re really just kind of stupid, in that they’re attracted to oversimplifications of complex phenomena. I think they are basically decent people, and moreover the kind of people for whom life has no meaning unless they’re involved in some sort of struggle for justice. It is in fact their moral conviction that makes them so dangerous. But no, I don’t want to shut them up, because I assume that, even though they will do a certain amount of economic damage, it will be limited, because no politician will really severely undermine economic growth for the sake of mitigating climate change.

    Greta Thunberg is the perfect spokesperson for the climate change catastrophe movement. She is box-of-rocks ignorant about the complexities of Science, Economics and politics, but also seriously, profoundly convinced of her own moral purity and, in the obverse, the wickedness of all who would disagree with her. Who is our leader? Anthony Watts, who is temperate, reasonable, fair-minded and well-educated. But not cute. Can we not find somebody cute to lead us? Come on, people.

    • Greta, cute? We must be thinking of different people: https://tinyurl.com/wdrwray

      But looks aside, absolutely right. The problem with Greta – which isn’t really a problem for her, but for everyone else – is that she has Asperger’s. If you’ve known such people, then you know that even if they’re practiced at appearing civil and patient while you discuss something with them, they’re just waiting their turn to shout you down while their inner voices rages “NO! That’s NOT MY OPINION!” That’s why she’s perfect for this role.

    • “Can we not find somebody cute to lead us?”

      I thought this lady did a great job, and a credible, intelligent presentation. I wonder how much abuse has been levelled at her by extremists. Possibly why her name is not mentioned in the vid.

      https://youtu.be/MU70facZc6A

  21. DMacKenzie: I will concede that my feelings toward Greta are less than cordial but, between us, one of is an extremist and the other isn’t.

    I just want to point out a few relevant facts. (1) I am taller than she is. (2) No one stole my childhood. I’ve got it in a box in the basement, and every now and then I take it to a an antique restorer for a cleaning. (3) The answer to her question, “How dare you?” is that I am daring. When I was growing up, that was considered a good quality. (4) When my mom was raising me she wasn’t too busy singing opera to take the time to explain to me that, when grown-ups are trying to scare me and want me to pay them money to dispel the fear they are trying to make me feel, they’re usually lying. (5) Shut up, Greta.

    Now does that sound extreme to you? I think not.

  22. Only the Scientifically challenged, Historically challenged, Politically Deranged and the Chemically addled thinks there is Climate Emergency. Democratic Florida Rep. Kathy Castor is obviously all of these apart from
    possibly Chemically addled. I don’t know about Chemically addled because I have never met her. I suggest she studies some science to remedy her ignorance and reads Brave New World by Aldus Huxley, and Animal Farm
    and 1984 by George Orwell noting these books are NOT instruction manuals on how to run society.

  23. “Sadly, I expect YouTube to cave and continue its policies of clamping down on climate skeptics and those who oppose so-called solutions like the Green New Deal or U.N. Paris climate pact,” he told The Washington Times. “YouTube has already initiated policies that amount to climate ‘virtue signaling’ with their disclaimers.”
    ____________________________________

    2tube now can

    – declare neutrality or

    – go full scientific,

    supporting

    — Democratic Florida Rep. Kathy Castor or

    — climate scientist Patrick Michaels

    ____________________________________

    Interesting times.

    – does 2tube want to set up a scientific department and take responsibility for following results, findings, or

    – just run a business and serve its customers.

Comments are closed.