“We do not deny climate change”: Rupert Murdoch Responds to Accusations

Left: Lachlan Murdoch by Eva Rinaldi – Cropped from https://www.flickr.com/photos/evarinaldiphotography/8778375791/, CC BY-SA 2.0, Link. Middle Rupert Murdoch by Eva RinaldiRupert Murdoch, CC BY-SA 2.0, Link. Right James Murdoch by NRKbeta [CC BY-SA]

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Rupert Murdoch has responded to accusations from his son James and others that his news organisation promotes climate denial.

‘We do not deny climate change’: Rupert Murdoch addresses son’s exit from board

By Zoe Samios
November 19, 2020 — 12.08pm

Rupert Murdoch has made his first public comments about the abrupt resignation of his son James Murdoch from News Corp’s board, rejecting assertions the company denies climate change or that he did not consider his son’s point of view.

At the company’s annual general meeting on Thursday morning (AEDT), Mr Murdoch was asked why he did not accommodate some of James Murdoch’s views on climate change and on US President Donald Trump. James Murdoch has long been seen to have more progressive political views than his family and was critical of Trump in a New York Times interview in October.

“Our board has many discussions, but James … claims that our papers have covered the bushfires in Australia without discussing climate change. We do not deny climate change, we are not deniers,” Mr Murdoch said.

Columns by Melbourne writer Andrew Bolt and Sky commentator (and The Australian Financial Review columnist) Rowan Dean in the tabloids and former ASX chairman Maurice Newman in The Australian have described climate change as a “cult” and “a socialist plot”. In a broadcast on News Corp-owned Sky News, Bolt criticised the “constant stream of propaganda” on the ABC about the climate crisis.

Read more: https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/we-are-not-climate-change-deniers-rupert-murdoch-addresses-son-s-exit-from-board-20201119-p56fy3.html

Tolerating diversity of opinion, in the form of providing wildly popular Murdoch Media personalities like Andrew Bolt a platform, does not mean Murdoch agrees with everything those personalities say.

But I guess old fashioned ideas like news managers giving their best journalists editorial freedom are no longer encouraged, at least when it comes to climate change.

Greens can be unforgiving of minor deviations from their dogma, even from people who helped found their movement.

Retired NASA scientist James Hansen, whose 1988 testimony pretty much kick started the climate movement, was accused of being a “denier” in 2015, because he does not think renewables alone will be enough to curb global CO2 emissions.

It is difficult to imagine someone being more alarmist than James Hansen; Hansen thinks the oceans will literally begin to boil if we don’t rapidly curb CO2 emissions. But Hansen still faced accusations of being a “denier”, because he thinks nuclear power should be an important part of the solution to climate change.

Update (EW): Tidied the text slightly.

112 thoughts on ““We do not deny climate change”: Rupert Murdoch Responds to Accusations

  1. Sorry, but I’m not going to shed one tear over James Hansen’s predicament . . . nor Rupert Murdoch’s, for that matter.

    • I agree Gordon.

      Start by asking what education these people have, and how many hours they have spent studying the science of catastrophic human-made global warming, aka “climate change”, etc. The answer is typically “An easy degree in the arts or pseudo-sciences” and “Less than one hour”.

      These people are sheep, being stampeded by wolves. They know nothing, and have invested no time or effort in trying to understand the nature of climate science, which is not that difficult for someone educated in real science, technology, engineering, math or medicine.

      Most global warming acolytes are just “running with the herd”, and don’t have the intellect or the integrity to hold a rational opinion on the subject.

      The “scientist” protagonists of the global warming fraud know they are lying – no rational person could be this stupid for this long. They routinely employ deceitful Leninist/Goebbels/Alinsky propaganda tactics to shout down their opponents, and never openly debate the science because they know they will lose. They rely upon the cowardly codpieces of the mainstream media to promote their falsehoods. It’s all climate lies – and always has been so.

    • Why would anyone seek to deny a fact of nature, which is what climate change is?

      What is under debate are the cause, duration, etc

      Murdoch answered correctly
      You can believe human released CO2 has zero influence on temperature (I’m in the “little bit” camp) and still acknowledge “climate change”.

    • I also agree with Gordon but think he is too kind. Question how many of these people have studied the science of climate change is too narrow. Should ask how many of these people have studied science at all and the history of science and the philosophy of science in order to be able to make judgmental statements on any matters of science, the error of drawing conclusion based on observation, the difference between drawing conclusions based on descriptive / deterministic correlations for while ignoring and not even raising questions on what do we not know and not understand. We so-called deniers are like Galileo Galilei who upon defending his views, on the earth circling the sun (in “Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems (1632),” was tried by the Inquisition, and found guilty of heresy, and forced to recant and put under house arrest for taking views that opposed the supposed orthodoxy. Models are not science… real science is being open minded and putting propositions through rigorous tests of their validity. Not doing is a mockery of science. Peer review is an utter failure.

    • Predicament is the exact right word. Faux News’s ratings are collapsing across the board, with only Tucker Carlson above water and we’ll see how long that lasts.

  2. I don’t know about the rest of Murdoch’s media empire but, Fox News has certainly jumped on the communist bandwagon. Their daytime shows are now trying to give CNN a run for their Money. Heck, MSDNC is starting to look Fair and Balanced compared to some of the FNC stuff.

    • ” I don’t know about the rest of Murdoch’s media empire but, Fox News has certainly jumped on the communist bandwagon.”

      Well, they haven’t jumped on the communist bandwagon yet, but we can certainly see how some of the Fox reporters “really” feel about Trump. They managed for the most part to keep their personal feelings to themselves during Trump’s term, but now that it looks to them like he has lost, they have lost their reluctance to criticize him.

      Conservatives are not happy with how Fox is treating Trump. I heard today that MSNBC beat Fox in the weekly ratings for the first time since 2001. It seems conservatives are tuning out Fox and tuning in Newsmax. At least during the day tme hours. The Fox and Friends morning program is still the best program on news tv, and the conservative commentators like Tucker, Hannity and Ingraham are still popular but the daytime coverage has turned to a lot of criticism of Trump. Unwarranted criticism, I might add, imo.

      I notice that Fox News has been heavily promoting Tucker and Hannity and Ingraham for the last few days during the daytime hours, obviously trying to win back conservatives. Hey Fox News Exectutives, it’s not Tucker and Hannity and Ingraham that are losing audience, its shows like Neal Cavuto and some of your younger reporters who are alienating your conservative viewers. And Howie.

      If Trump ends up proving a massive voting conspiracy and remains as president, we are going to have a lot of fun reviewing the statements of a whole lot of people over the last few weeks.

      This election cheating attempt was plain as day. Everyone saw this coming. So what would I do if I were President Trump in this situation. Well, I could activate the DOJ and the FBI and CIA and use them to smash the voting conspiracy. But that would be illegal, using the power of the Federal Government to attack another political party. That’s what criminal Democrats like Obama and Biden do. No, what I would have done was hire, using my own money or the RNC’s money, about 10,000 private investigators so that I would know every move the Democrat election officials took. They wouldn’t be ablt to sneeze without me knowing it. Although I would stay out of their bedrooms.

      The Left wants to dismiss Trump and wants everyone else to do so, too. We will know one way or another within about two weeks.

      The naysayers should shut their mouths. Let us know when Trump does something illegal. Untils then, just shut up, will you? No, I didn’t think so. It doesn’t matter, as long as Trump follows the law, he can continue doing what he is doing regardless of the criticism.

      You’ve heard that old saying about what Payback is, haven’t you?

      And If Trump can’t make his case in the Courts for four more years, then he’ll start up a rival television network and run Fox and the liars at MSNBC and CNN out of business. Which would probably be the most valuable service he could do his countrymen outside of being president.

      • Tom,
        If the election was fraudulent and everyone saw it coming then Trump is really more incompetent than most people think. He had 6 months to marshal the entire resources of the Federal Government to stop a rigged election and not only did he fail but his lawyers can’t even produce any evidence that the election was rigged in court. His lawyer are a joke and surely he should be able to find some half-way decent ones.

        • There’s already far more evidence of voting irregularities than there ever was for the Russia conspiracy hoax. And it’s unsurprising that you don’t understand that elections are held and controlled by the states. We get that you think that the presidency should be an elected monarchy, but we’re not quite there even in spite of efforts by you and your fellow travelers.

          • Do you really mean to say that if the US president thought that people were going to engage in a massive criminal conspiracy to steal an election there is nothing they could do to stop it? According to the FBI election crime is a federal crime if the ballot includes federal candidates so rigging the US presidental election would certainly be a federal crime which means that Trump could have done something about it if he was competent. Instead he did nothing and let the democrats steal it (according to him) making him worse than useless. Not to mention all of the Republicans in office in various states that let it happen as well.

          • Election Fraud in a US Presidential Election is a federal crime and hence Trump could have gotten the FBI etc, to investigate it. But he did nothing and the democrats stole it which is what he deserves for such an act of incompetency.

          • Izaak, I have to say your naivete is showing. You should read more. The Swamp is deep, and finding the people that needed to go and finding people to replace them is not an easy task. You state that the election tampering is a federal crime, and the FBI would be all over it. You seem to have slept through the last five years when the FBI was actively trying to overturn the election results of 2016 – up to and during the impeachment itself when the FBI was holding evidence that would have shut down the impeachment before it even started. People in power in the FBI withheld that information .

            Does any of this ring a bell?

        • This is the part most people fail to understand. Trump and his people knew about the fraud and let it happen because you need to show the people the fraud.

          If they tried to expose the fraud beforehand the expose(y) would have been deniable by the democrats. If the fraud was shut down before the election and Trump won freely people would not have believed there was attempted fraud.

          By letting it happen this way, everybody sees the fraud, Trump wins by applying the constitution and in future elections the system will be changed in such a way that fraud will be very difficult.

        • That is silly. The Trump legal team say they have a thousand pages of sworn affidavits of witnesses. In law, witnesses ARE evidence. You can say you think they are lying, or bluffing. That may be true, but the consequences of doing so would be terrible. At the very least these lawyers will become laughing stocks – if they’re lucky. More likely they will become targets of libel suits that will ruin them. I assume they didn’t get where they are today by displaying that level of stupidity.

          We won’t know until this is all laid out in front of the courts.

        • You don’t understand how the US operates. States run elections; Trump can’t tell them what to do. The federal government could impose federal election laws upon states, but Congress has to craft those laws, and the House majority is is against Trump. Trump tried to enact election reform early in his term, but it was thwarted somehow.

          • Izaak, Trump tried through the courts to stop the last minute (after mail in voting started) changes Dem states (and Courts) enacted to loosen election integrity; signature requirements, witness requirements, opening up poll dates before and after the election, restricting poll watchers, etc.

            In addition the Dems are masters at gaming the system “legally”; mass distribution of UNREQUESTED ballots, ballot harvesting (in some areas) etc. Not to mention the blatant bias of the MSM and the clear interference of social media (which STILL continues – every innocuous post involving the GOP gets a Facebook warning that “Biden is the PROJECTED winner” even though that term is legally meaningless; the election has NOT been certified.)

            Of course there are the long standing Dem practices such as voting for the dead (Mayor Daley bragged he won the election for JFK that way), bussing voters district to district or from out of state etc

            Most of us thought the only way DJT could win was to legally outvote Biden. TRUMP GOT MORE VOTES THAN ANY SITTING PRESIDENT before him! Biden, who never campaigned and could draw a crowd of no more than a few score got even more, MOST AFTER THE POLLS CLOSED AND COUNTING WAS CEASED for the evening.

          • icisil the somehow was due to RINOs and Never Trumpers being more concerned about their re-election and believing the Democratic Narrative. Singular it was Paul Ryan’s inability or naiveté to understand the SILENT COUP.

        • Silly!

          Why stop a bear in the woods ten feet from stepping in your trap?

          Does that put a trophy bear hide on your wall or floor?

          No, it allows the beast another shot at your beehives.

          Sometimes I wonder…

        • Izzie
          Most of the federal government ( aka deep state ) are Democrats with no desire to help Trump in any way. Also, mail in ballots with marginal signature checking, or no signature checking, are almost impossible to detect after they are removed from the envelope with the signature on. In addition, sending mail ballots to people who did not ask for them, to way out of date voter rolls is an invitation for fraud.

          Not to mention the very suspicious behavior of Democrats in Detroit and Philadelphia keeping Republican ballot counting watchers too far away to see the counting. Sometimes Republicans were thrown out of the building (Detroit) and the windows were boarded up from the inside (probably with cardboard)

          There were large numbers of unfolded Michigan ballots with ONLY a Biden vote — no down votes. But … here in Michigan if you only wanted to make one mark on a ballot, a normal person would mark “all Democrats”. Who would make one mark, and vote ONLY for Biden, when one mark a few inches away on the ballot, would have voted for ALL the Democrats, which I’m sure a lot of people did legally in Detroit.

          The Democrats have been so dishonest since Trump was nominated, with no regard for truth and evidence, that only a fool would claim no election fraud, or even typical election fraud, in 2020. Trump has made Democrats reveal themselves to be horrible, intolerant people and that may be the best thing he did as president. Fast tracking the COVID virus vaccines may be the other — we’ll see.

          My wife is afraid to tell people she voted for Trump or say anything positive about him to a large majority of her friends who are liberals. Something is sick when half the country gets angry at different views.

          I voted for a Republican this year for the first time since 1980, because Biden is a crook, and not too bright even in his peak years. But I’m not afraid to tell people I voted for Trump. I like to tell leftists Trump was the best president in American history, even though I don’t believe that at all, just to watch them lose about 40 IQ points and go berserk. Always angry leftists are not used to debating anyone of their beliefs. That’s obvious with climate science for many decades. Leftists are great at character attacks, however. I think all American leftists should all be deported to France, or maybe Australia. We would have to pay France or Australia to take them?

        • “If the election was fraudulent and everyone saw it coming then Trump is really more incompetent than most people think. He had 6 months to marshal the entire resources of the Federal Government to stop a rigged election and not only did he fail but his lawyers can’t even produce any evidence that the election was rigged in court.”

          Well, as I was insinuating, we don’t really know what, if any steps Trump took to keep the election on the “straight and narrow”. I think we are going to find out in the next couple of weeks.

          As for not producing evidence of the massive computer voter fraud conspiracy, they haven’t gotten to that point yet. You produce evidence in Court. You don’t try your case in front of a bunch of leftwing reporters. The fact is you don’t know what evidence the Trump lawyers have. They are risking their sterling reputations if they don’t have the evidence they claim they have. I would be very surprised if Sidney Powell was exaggerating the situation.

          So, what does this presidential challenge boil down to? Well, there is the case to be made that some States did not follow their own election rules and counted votes after election day that should not have been counted. If the U.S. Supreme Court rules that ballots counted after the State deadline are ineligible, then Trump wins the election. Trump was leading by over 600,000 votes in Pennslyvania at the end of election day, and he was leading by substantial amounts in the other contested States, enough to win the election.

          There is the case of certain States treating Democrat voters differently from Republican voters, where they allowed and encouraged Democrats to correct their flawed ballots in advance, while not giving the same opportunity to Republican voters. If the U.S. Supreme Court rules in Trump’s favor, then Trump wins the election.

          And last, there is the claim of massive computer voter fraud which supposedly switched millions of votes from Trump to Biden. If this is shown to be true, then Trump wins the presidency, as State legislatures will take it into their own hands to rectifiy this situation and Trump wins.

          Don’t pay attention to any lower court rulings. The only rulings that will count in the end are the rulings from the U.S. Supreme Court. The U.S. Constituion says State legislatures are to set the rules of the election, not election officials, or governors or judges, only the State legislatures. If the U.S. Supreme Court upholds this law, then Trump wins.

        • The US government doesn’t control elections. States and counties do.

          But even had he tried to pass federal legislation requiring in person voting with seccure ID checks, the Democrat-controlled House would have blocked it.

          The GOP had a window in 2017-18 in which to get rid of blatantly abusable voting machines and software, but didn’t make fighting electoral fraud a priority.

          The risk of misuse has been known since at least 2003, when a Democrat candidate in NY sounded the alarm about rigged voting machines. But both parties have benefitted from digital fraud. Mostly Democrats however, and not just against Republicans, as with Clinton vs Sanders in 2016. To shut him up, she bought him an expensive vacation home.

      • Systemic Voting Corruption:

        In the name of “vote privacy,” create a mail-in ballot with personal id on the envelope, but the ballot is on a separate piece of paper inside. The ballot displays not one shred of the identity of the voter.

        Now, 600,000 of these ballots arrive at a big city election board. In the middle of the night. Dumped by USPS all at once. With a hard deadline for processing.

        [begin speculation, based either on general sloppiness or deliberate manipulation]

        The ballots get separated from the envelopes. Supposedly only after validation of personal info. Yes, there is a bar code on the envelope. That does not guarantee that the citizen of the barcode is the citizen of the signature on the envelope. Nor that the barcode person lives at that address, or is alive. It “might” reject the ballot when the barcode is scanned if there is already another already in the system – that would require real-time crosscheck against a perfectly updated dataset. This step could get ignored so easy, and the envelope thrown away.

        Fraud/invalidation happens.

        [end spec]

        • The easiest way corrupt a possible ballot is for a single person, a family member, religious or community leader to either place the mark on every paper and give them back to the elector or supervise every electors vote. Not unhearded of in various communities in the UK

      • Yeah, no. I voted for Trump, but he’s just being an a-hole, something which he’s very good at being. In fact, probably about the only thing. He’s also a lying, narcissistic moron. None of these claims of voter fraud have any merit. None. What Trump is doing is a threat to democracy, and his delaying tactics are hampering a smooth transition for the next president. Trump’s actions border on treason, and those who support what he’s doing are imbeciles.

        • Treason would be weaponizing the Flu Season to unseat a President. Covid-19 isn’t even a particularly deadly flu; less than 10k deaths by Covid WITHOUT comorbidities like PNEUMONIA, HEART ATTACKS, and BLUNT TRAUMA.

          Noticed that Dem Al Gore got 36 days of challenging election results WITHOUT all the cr@p being shoved at Trump. Another case of “one law for thee, but another for me” Democrat cognition.

          • Glen W. Westfrog
            COVID is the most dangerous flu since the 1918 pandemic.
            Flu does not kill people directly.
            The actual cause of death is usually pneumonia.
            Flu deaths prior to 2019 were a CDC estimate made with computer models.
            Almost everyone who dies with the flu, and perhaps EVERY flu death, has other medical problems, known or unknown, or genetic weaknesses, known or unknown. So it is a judgement call on whether to blame COVID for a death. Most doctors think the CDC has ALWAYS overstated flu deaths, and I would be shocked if 2020 was any different.

            Please don’t claim COVID is not a particularly deadly flu when it has been so far, and the pandemic is still in progress. Perhaps only 1 in 1,000 infected die, but that is high for the flu, except for the very deadly SARS1 (10% died) and MERS (35%died) — but both did not infect many people.

          • “Please don’t claim COVID is not a particularly deadly flu when it has been so far, and the pandemic is still in progress. Perhaps only 1 in 1,000 infected die, but that is high for the flu, except for the very deadly SARS1 (10% died) and MERS (35%died) — but both did not infect many people.”

            There is another aspect of the Wuhan virus that is not like your normal flu bug: It causes inflammation throughout the whole body, including the brain, and this inflammation may cause long-term health effects for *millions* of people. That’s millions of people that wouldn’t have to go see the doctor except for the fact that they were infected by the Wuhan virus. That’s millions of extra patients adding to the costs of health care. A regular flu virus does not have all these consequences.

            People who were infected with SARS-1 in 2003, are still experiencing adverse health effects from their infection. SARS-2 appears to have similar traits. The long-term adverse health effects of the Wuhan virus may prove to be much more problamatic on the human population than the actual infection.

            It’s not a good idea to allow the Wuhan virus to run wild in the population if we can prevent it. Fortunately, it looks like we can prevent it with vaccines and we can treat an infection effectively if we start the treatment soon enough.

            The current standard of care is to do nothing if a person is not sick enough to go to the hospital. This should be changed to treating high-risk patients immediately upon discovering the infection, and I would say ideally we should treat *everyone* who test positive, because the drugs used in treatment are not dangerous, and because we don’t know which person will handle the disease without aftereffects and which person will be seriously impacted by the infection. Do it like they do in Turkey: treat everyone who tests positive with medications as soon as possible.

            The demonization of hydroxychloriquine has sent us down this erroneous path of not treatig people immedately upon infection. No telling how many people died because of this stupidity.

        • Really?

          Ever hear of the Drop and Roll?

          Or you have an explanation why some voting precincts got 350% turnout compared to their list of registered voters?

          Or Trump gets 15% more votes than last time and a guy who stays in his basement, couldn’t remember where he was on a fourth of his infrequent rallies, and was pleased with a crowd of 200 shows up, beats him by 6 million votes?

          Remember Trump on his last three days did 15 rallies that averagrd 30,000 people EACH! And his fsvorability rating was 52%, several percent above Obama’s re-election bid.

          But to top it off, the Primary model, which is not based on subjective, manipulated opinion polls and has worked best at predicting the winner over the past 100 years, had Trump winning over 360 electoral votes.

          All Biden had was Dominion voting machines running election software made in Venezuela, partly financed by the CCP!

          Yup, nothing to see here, folks; move along.

          • “Or you have an explanation why some voting precincts got 350% turnout compared to their list of registered voters?”

            Yes, I just heard that 70 percent of precincts around Detroit were reporting more votes than there were voters. The Republican Majority leader in Michigan sounds like he is going to call for a two week delay in certifying Michigan’s vote to look into the reason for why there are more votes than voters. That sounds like a good idea to me.

          • François, I don’t have a list of the affected precincts in Detroit. All I heard was the statement that 70 percent of them were showing more votes cast than they had voters. There should be a public filing of the lawsuit soon so the details will be there.

        • “What Trump is doing is a threat to democracy, and his delaying tactics are hampering a smooth transition for the next president. Trump’s actions border on treason, and those who support what he’s doing are imbeciles.”

          What Trump is doing is perfectly within the law and he owes it to the American people to make sure this election was done fairly. Seventy-four million Americans think there was cheating going on during this election. To say otherwise, is what an imbecile would say.

          You want to talk about Treason? Obama and Biden used the power of the federal government to try to undermine Trump, the leader of their political opposition. That’s treason. There’s no doubt they did it. So the US has a traitor as the so-called president-elect. Well, at least you didn’t vote for the traitor.

        • Cobb
          Why would you vote for someone you think so little of? Perhaps you are lying in an attempt to strengthen your complaints? If so, then you are little better than what you complain Trump is.

          You said, “None of these claims of voter fraud have any merit.” You know that how? Are you clairvoyant? Are you a high-ranking employee in the FBI or other agency that provides you with information the rest of us don’t get?

          Are you saying that some people don’t deserve their day in court if they have a grievance? If the courts find no evidence to support the claims, the actions will be dismissed. The system is set up to allow challenges. Yet, you would deny Trump the opportunity to exercise the checks and balances! What does that say about you? Is it treasonous to deny someone their rights?

          I should think that anyone who isn’t an “imbecile” would want to know the facts, and not just assume what the liberal Media is telling us “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.” It should be evident to anyone who is objective that the ‘news’ outlets lie by omission and choose pejorative words to describe Trump and his actions. Anyone who trusts the Media without verification deserves the title of “imbecile.”

          In case you hadn’t noticed, Biden is moving forward in finding appointments for his administration. Although, one might ask why he hadn’t already done that during the time he was sequestered in his basement instead of campaigning. It is not a given that Biden is the “next president.” He is the apparent winner of the electoral college vote. However, until the vote takes place, he is not even the president-elect.

          Your duplicitousness is evident to all who are not blinded by bias and hatred.

    • It appears perhaps somebody with influence brought Tucker Carlson back in line sometime earlier today. Fox, at least in part, may not be dead yet.

      • They may as well put a fork in it. There’s a veritable mountain of evidence there was massive voter fraud and Tucker refuses to even look at it. He’s been bought off and Fox is out of the top 20 rated cable shows except for Hannity. Even Ingraham has embraced the dark side.

        But this voter fraud is nothing new–some have been tracking it for a decade and it was obvious in 2018 and 2016 in the US. Trump hss decided to put a stop to it once and for all.

  3. It’s fun watching the cult eat their own.

    I wonder when it will be Greta’s turn, as it will surely come.
    Some younger even more delusional disturbed teen will out-Greta her and then accuse Greta of denial

    Sad but inevitable

  4. Nuclear power is the answer but is denied us by the self-described climate elites.

    Seems rather contradictory, doesn’t it?

  5. The Guardian, 12 December 2015, by John Milman,
    “James Hansen, Father of Climate Change Awareness, calls Paris talks a ‘fraud’.
    – “John Kerry rejects scientist’s claim Paris talks were ‘fraud’.”
    So the “father of global warming” is a denialist?
    Climate Change is real.
    CAGW is an unproven scientific hypothesis.
    Rupert Murdoch is entirely correct.

    • Occasionally Murdoch’s The Australian newspaper would publish an article by a scientist who would produce evidence that it is highly improbable that carbon dioxide is causing dangerous climate change. Nothing much lately. A raging left wing site, GETUP was organizing a petition to stop advertisers in the paper. It did the same to a radio station with the nations top broadcaster, Alan Jones, a climate sceptic, which cost the station millions.

  6. I don’t deny climate change; but I _DO_ deny that it’s man-made. Climate changes; it always has, and always will. We didn’t cause it, and we can’t (yet) prevent it.

    “Climate change” is no longer a SCIENTIFIC issue; it’s a RELIGIOUS issue. People BELIEVE IN climate change, as we once believed that Tinkerbelle was real. So I’m not a “climate denier”; I’m a “climate HERETIC”, denying the revealed truths of the Climate Change Religion.

    • My pet peeve are the Holier than Thou academics and politicians who use phrases like “I believe in Science” or “I don’t deny Climate Change”. Those are meaningless statements and at least the academics should know better. (Who goes around saying “I believe in Geology.”?)

      Like the use of ad hominems, those phrases are used primarily (by those who DO know better) to shut down discussion.

      We are now at a point where it is imperative that we push back at every opportunity. Force them to define the specific “scientific” point upon which they imagine disagreement. Separate “scientific” issues from “policy” issues.

      • “My pet peeve are the Holier than Thou academics and politicians who use phrases like “I believe in Science” or “I don’t deny Climate Change”. Those are meaningless statements and at least the academics should know better. (Who goes around saying “I believe in Geology.”?)”

        “I believe in Geology”. That was funny, George! 🙂

        Anyone who uses the device “I believe in science” immediately signals to me that they probably don’t know much about what they are talking about. That’s not an argument someone who knows what they are talking about, would make. Someone who knows what they are talking about would actually put forth a specific argument.

        • Tom
          If the journalists were doing their job, they would ask anyone who claims to “believe in science” to define science and describe the Scientific Method in 25 words or less.

  7. It is not a black and white issue. There is big gray area in the middle. Virtually all the media hypes up climate change. Fox does not hype up climate change to ridiculous levels and rarely will even show the other side. His son is all about shutting down anybody that doesn’t spread the climate change propaganda.

    • That is true, Fox News does not hype Human-caused Climate Change. They barely discuss it, and when they do, it is usually from the skeptic point of view.

      Fox News is a good tv channel. They feature a few Leftists during daytime hours, but they always outnumber them with conservatives, although I do wish Fox would fire Donna Brazil. I have no use for a liar and a cheat and I certainly don’t want to hear about the issues of the day from such a person as her. Brazil slipped Hillary the questions to one of the debates in advance, among other dishonest things she has done.

      Where they made their big mistake was calling Arizona early for Biden. That set off Trump and his supporters and naturally Trump complained publicly, and Fox News people felt defensive and pushed back on Trump for really the first time.

      One of Trump’s advisors went on Fox and Friends one morning and questioned the Arizona Fox News poll, and the three Fox morning anchors got a little defensive (they are all good, honest people) and asked Trump’s spokeman why he was trashing the Fox poll. Trump’s advisor said the reason Fox’s poll was inaccurate (giving Biden a 12 point lead at the time) was because Fox was polling Democrats are a rate of 47 percent when in the last election Democrats only represented 28 percent of the vote. The Fox News anchors did not argue with Trump’s spokeman. I assume because he was correct.

      The next two weeks are going to be fun. The Traitor Joe Biden may have to go back to his basement. Then we can investigate him and his son for being unregistered foreign agents. Among other things.

      • The bookies have a different view. As the election night wore on the odds on Trump winning dropped to 8:1. At this point massive bets were placed on Biden to win, then Fox called Arizona. The polls closed with Trump way ahead and then miraculously overnight truck loads of votes appeared and Trump lost his lead and Biden was now in front. The bookies paid out squillions to those who had voted on Biden – who knew?

        • “The polls closed with Trump way ahead and then miraculously overnight truck loads of votes appeared and Trump lost his lead and Biden was now in front.”

          Isn’t it strange that the vote counting in all these contested States stopped at about the same time and resumed at about the same time. A rather unusual coincidence, I would say.

          Sideny Powell, one of Trump’s lawyers, says the reason the vote count was stopped when Trump was so far ahead in all these contested States was because the voter turnout for Trump was so high that it screwed up the cheating algorithm on the vote counting machines, so they had to pause and fix the problem.

          Yes, if the vote counting was stopped at midnight on election night, Trump would have won in a landslide.

          We’ll know the answer to the computer voter fraud issue , one way or another, shortly.

          I note that Dominion, the company at the center of these computer voter fraud allegations, claimed they were a good, American company, and were eager to defend themselves. So a meeting was setup between Dominion people and Republican legislators, and the Dominion people failed to show up, and at last report, are heading for the hills. That looks a little bit suspicious to me.

      • Calling Arizona for Biden wasn’t the beginning. Have you ever listened to Chris Wallace? He’s an avid anti-Trumper, but that was never so clear as when he “moderated” the Biden-Trump debate, which quickly descended into a Trump v. Wallace debate. Wallace: “Given that Global Warming will destroy the planet if we don’t do something, why doesn’t your administration do anything to reverse Global Warming?” (OK, not an exact quote.)

        I myself concede the planet may be warming, but then we are still in an interglacial, and I think it unlikely the planet will warm as much as during previous interglacial periods. A warm Earth has always been good for the planet’s inhabitants – with no exceptions. And it has always reversed to deadly glacial periods. No runaway heat. No boiling oceans.

  8. Some politicians are honest enough to admit they are trying to replace capitalism with something. Trudeau Jr. (Dances With Unicorns is his aboriginal name) has proposed a policy reset. link

    Trudeau has had enough disasters that he should have learned a thing or two by now …

    On the bright side, Jordan Peterson is recovering and will start producing again in the near future. The left hates him because he cuts through their b.s. We need a lot more of that.

  9. “a “cult” and “a socialist plot”

    You Eric – and your Murdochian ilk – are poisoning a deep well. Have you no decency?

    • Loydo, do you know what first alerted me that there was something wrong with claims of an imminent climate emergency?

      The engineering absurdity of the solutions which were proposed.

      If your fellow travellers back in the 90s had said “look we really don’t like nuclear power, but CO2 is such an urgent problem, we really have no choice”, I would probably have never questioned claims that CO2 is a dangerous greenhouse gas. I would have been impressed that green nuclear haters were prepared to set aside their concerns for the greater good of saving the planet.

        • NOT a lie.

          They KNOW that climate changes NATURALLY all the time

          It is gullible twerps like YOU that DENY this.

          What else do we DENY that you have actual scientific proof for?

          You are still TOTALLY EMPTY on proof of the most basic FALLACY of your CULT religion., ie warming by atmospheric CO2.

          And YES, the whole aim of the scam is to gain control and enforce a SOCIALIST agenda

          If you did know that, you have been spending your time with your head well and truly buried where the sun doesn’t shine. !

          There is PLENTY of evidence that so-called “climate scientists” have fraudulently altered data to attain their goals.

          There is plenty of evidence that the climate models are twisted to produce a desired outcome

          This is NOT SCIENCE

          If you knew anything about actual science, you would know that.

          But you remain willfully IGNORANT of REALITY, because it would impinge too deeply on your cult-like AGW fantasies.

          • Having read climate science articles and studies as a hobby since 1997, and edited a climate science blog since 2014, I think I have enough experience to agree with Fred 250. The CAPITAL letters make his comments especially interesting. But Fred, how can you say that always wrong, wild guesses of the future climate, done using computer games, is NOT science? It is science, I say. Junk science. Done by people with science degrees. … So what? I have a BS degree, and as a result, I am an expert at detecting BS. Perhaps that what attracted me to climate junk science. Of course none of this matters because a Swedish high school dropout said the world is going to end in 10 years.

        • Loydo – Maybe we don’t trust scientists. Too many of us following Anthony’s site are scientists, and know the veracity of our colleagues well. It’s why we keep saying “Show us the raw data” (and test/measurement conditions) because even in university we watched students cheat, or at least as a TA I certainly saw a lot of it. That didn’t change much went I joined the workforce – especially in my Government counterparts.

      • Eric,
        well said. Also there were actually periods a decade ago when many of the Green academics aired the need for bringing nuclear into the “solution”.

    • Loy-dumb.. junior AGW CULT member

      You just “BELIEVE” [spooky music]

      You rant and rave without producing one tiny bit of EVIDENCE.

      You refuse to accept that you are PROVABLY WRONG about everything you think you believe.

      Those are the actions of a fundaMENTAList CULTIST

      Stop DENYING that CAGW is a CULT-LIKE RELIGION.

    • STILL WAITING for your APOLOGY when you were PROVEN WRONG about Indonesia being the biggest exporter of COAL and got it WRONG about the data I posted being from 2013…. when it was clearly marked as from 2019..

      Have you got the DECENCY or HONESTY to apologise ?

      ————-

      And how can anyone poison the AGW well ???????

      It is already a stinking pit of putrid green slime, lies, deceit, and BS.

      But you are happy there, so I suppose that is that matters to you.

      • I apologise Fred. One of your links did appear to be showing data from 2013 -https://www.indexmundi.com/energy/?product=coal&graph=exports , the other is from 2019, I looked at the first but not the second. But as Kev so kindly pointed out later, Indonesia’s coal exports have indeed been more than Autralia’s since 2017. So soory, you were right and thank you for straightening me out on that point on coal exporting and for doing it so patiently and politely.

        “WRONG and LYING again little worm”
        “your ignorance is showing AS ALWAYS. !!”
        “Now off you slither, and wipe that BS of yours off your face”

      • Fred250
        Last week my wife,who rarely cooks (I do) , had a big bowl of putrid green slime. It looked bad. It smelled bad. I asked her what the “green slime” was. I got a dirty look and was told to come back in an hour. By then the green slime had turned into the best Greek spinach pie I ever ate. I’m on a diet, so I only ate thirteen pieces.

    • You dare talk about decency? Have you seen Guardian lately?

      The use of hyperbolic and frankly violence-inducing language is apparent on the left. Go and take your “decency” argument to your mainstream media. They abandoned it and chose this way forward.

      • Typical of the left, accuse the other side of that which they are guilty. It’s the left that has abandoned decency long ago – as can be seen from their constant vile attacks on anyone they disagree with of being an *-ist or a *-phobe or a deniar or supporting/not denouncing *-isms (regardless of how many times someone has public denounced and rejected that very *-ism), their calls to have decent people “cancelled” and removed from their jobs and the public sphere (even to the point of lying about them and making up the most vile of stories about them) for the crime of having a different opinion than the left, and their violently taking to the streets and rioting. There are none as intolerant as the so-called tolerant left.

  10. Any news outlet not filled with endless alarmist climate claptrap is ‘denialist’.
    For example:
    “Within as little as 10 years, the world will be faced with a choice: arable farming either continues to feed the world’s animals or it continues to feed the world’s people. It cannot do both” (George Monbiot The Guardian 24 Dec 2002).
    “climate change will destroy us. rioting and nuclear war· Britain will be ‘Siberian’ in less than 20 years·” (The Guardian 22 Feb 2004 12.33).
    “Ice-free Arctic in two years heralds methane catastrophe – scientist” (The Guardian 25 Jul 2013).

    • Chris,
      You will have noticed a common agent in the storylines you highlight, namely the Guardian.
      For some unknown reason that propagandist rag, populated as it is by science deniers such as Monbiot gets more coverage that it should. It falls into the same genre of scientific publishing accuracy, as the Beano. The only difference between the two being, they have better cartoonists at the Beano.
      Clearly, the lack of education in todays schools, has created a generation who think the Beano was the real world. The Guardian is a natural progression for them, as it simply endorses their childish level of knowledge.

  11. re: Global… climate… whatever

    [catastrophic] [anthropogenic] climate evolution (CACE)

    That said, donate to WWF (World Walrus Foundation). Save the birds, the bats, whack a wind turbine. Save the flora and fauna, clear the Green blight. And, for good measure, for social progress, medical progress, throw another baby… Fetal-American on the barby. #Planned #Wicked

    • And above all save the Christmas bonusses of the chief executives. WWF annual report: WWF UK has 12 ‘officers’ raking in more than 60K annually, 6 of them over 100K. A wage, sorry, remuneration, that Joe Bloggs can only dream of.

  12. The machinations of Earth’s climate(s) make for fascinating academic research projects.

    Thinking that man’s activities are the major driver of climatic behaviors is, however, arrant nonsense. And then also looking for ways to “fight” climate changes is the tipping point into abject lunacy.

    No wonder the climate alarmist sects are descending into internal heretic stonings.

  13. Poor ol’ Rupert-this is what happens when you fail to raise your sons to be men. They are but mere spawn that grew into cuckolds married to liberal harpies who order them around like the beta males they are . You brought this on yourself-now deal with it!

  14. Talk about an emotive word! How can the term ‘climate change’ be in anyway meaningful unless qualified by a description of exactly what that change might be? Anyone uttering the term should be challenged to provide such an explanation including their reason for believing in a stated value for climate sensitivity (against the range of other values) which they will of course be quoting.

  15. This is not about the climate. It is about daddy problems.

    James should be spanked, sent to bed without his supper, and be grounded until he learns to not act up in front of strangers.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *