A few weeks ago, I stated WUWT would be moving to a “war footing” due to the election of Biden and the inevitable headlong rush into the “climate crisis” mania that seems to be gripping elected officials, media, and teachers.
They seem to really believe that the world is headed for hell in a climate handbasket – of course, we know better. We know a good portion of it is just rhetoric and unsupported by actual observations.
To that end, the only way to fight such disinformation is with factual information, and that’s why after months of development by Charles and me, I’m proud to announce the companion website to WUWT: everythingclimate.org “EC” for short.
The idea behind EC is to cover specific climate topics in a pro and con way, so that people can examine and compare, and hopefully make up their own minds. We have four categories at the moment, and a few dozen sub-titles covering specific claims/arguments that are commonly in the news and are contentious.
You may have noticed the past couple of days that the word “EverythingClimate” appeared in the top WUWT menu bar. That’s because we have WUWT integrated with EC at the menu level covering topics.
You might ask: why do we have a second website done this way?
It’s simple – I wanted a site that was entirely a factual website, without discussions that could be used as a reference. I also wanted a website that has the word “climate” in it as opposed to WUWT, which has no such word. This might be helpful in search engines. It’s certainly helpful in discussions, since climate alarmists put on blinders, shut their minds, open their mouths and scream “climate deniers” anytime WUWT is mentioned. EC doesn’t have that baggage. Finally, speaking of search engines, EC will have SEO separate from WUWT.
We aren’t going to change the climatized brain-dead, but we will be able to reach thoughtful people.
I welcome pro/con topic ideas for EC.
There’s more to come. Thanks for your support.
– Anthony
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Thankyou.
There is a need for integration of information. Any subject has dozens of articles on WUWT and other fora, but many are just snatches in time and space.
I vote for coverage of the basic physics of CO2 and atmosphere, which I believe shows that it can have only limited effect on average climate temperature, most of which has already been realized.
That is a fundamental which reduces much other debate to simply ‘how can we forecast when and where to prepare?’, noting a recent article suggesting the North/Arctic is warming more slowly than the rest of the earth.
Yes, I should pull together links I’ve saved, as a start, and offer it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_panic
In recent centuries the mass media have become important players in the dissemination of moral indignation, even when they do not appear to be consciously engaged in sensationalism or in muckraking. Simply reporting a subset of factual statements without contextual nuance can be enough to generate concern, anxiety, or panic.[4][Stanley Cohen states that moral panic happens when “a condition, episode, person or group of persons emerges to become defined as a threat to societal values and interests”. Examples of moral panic include the belief in widespread abduction of children by predatory paedophiles,[5][6][7] belief in ritual abuse of women and children by satanic cults, [8], global warming, and concerns over the effects of music lyrics.[9]
YES! This is science explained the right way.
Highly recommended as possible topics.. 1– I found enlightening an important discussion on Climate Model truth and fakery. The Rational Climate e-Book by P. Poyet https://patricepoyet.org
Author says: This book addresses all aspects of climate and paleo-climates, from atmospheric physics, to astronomical influences and geological and geochemical drivers. It covers the computer models claiming to simulate the climate and the policies that are projected from them.T
Andy May introduced https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/01/18/the-rational-climate-e-book/
The Climate Model misinformation and misapplication is very important as Washington’s governor misuses it to legislate an early arrival of the Promised Land for all citizens of the State. The governor has wrested decision-making on electricity away from experts, power engineers and planners, saying them “incapable”. The governor’s action is an identical carbon copy of the Climate Change Law 2009 that proved tragic and brought misery more than a decade ago in Ontario. Following Ontario’s Climate law passage electricity costs skyrocketed and jumped 25% in single years.
2– Debunking the simply physics slogan by Wijngaarden (https://climatediscussionnexus.com/category/videos/backgrounders/), Fact Checks (https://climatediscussionnexus.com/category/videos/fact-checks/)
3—More on the molecular physics
Interview series of Will Happer https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/09/04/interview-series-of-will-happer/
4— TRUMP ADVISER WILLIAM HAPPER TALKS CLIMATE ALARMISM DURING COP25 IN MADRID Methane and carbon dioxide co2 Trump Adviser William Happer Talks Climate Alarmism During COP25 in Madrid https://youtu.be/j8KxVQFoyT0
5– Message for all Americans Why Carbon Dioxide is Unimportant by Don Dears
//ddears.com/2021/01/05/message-for-all-americans/
6— Methane and Climate W. A. van Wijngaarden1 and W. Happer 2 1Department of Physics and Astronomy, York University, Canada 2Department of Physics, Princeton University, USA November 22, 2019
Again, Thank You Anthony
Pure gold from East Anglia no less-
East Anglian beetles shed light on UK climate 4,000 years ago (msn.com)
Get out of those cloistered sheltered workshops doomsters.
I like this new site (https://everythingclimate.org/) so much that I’m going to put in my email signature. I do a lot of emailing here in Massachusetts battling against the *&^%$ who want to terminate all forest management who are aligned with those who want the state to be net free by 2050. This state is so crazy that very few people here are even aware that there are very intelligent AGW skeptics. They just assume that those who don’t follow the new religion are “science deniers”. This is a difficult state to live in if you’re a AGW skeptic! When I send out my frequent emails- I send to state enviro agencies, major enviro groups in the state, forestry folks, large forest owners and the leading forestry haters, and the priests and prophets of the new AGW religeon, including Bill McKibben who lives in nearby VT- a true fanatic! Any way, like I said, I’m going to pitch this new site and hope it cathes on. Many of the people I send my “rants” to have connections in the larger world- even though you wouldn’t know it with the total lack of any AGW skepticism in the state’s MSM. I suggest most have careers tied in with this new religion- so even if they are somewhat skeptical, they don’t have the guts to say so publicly.
finally
Great work – But how about one more section on all those temp charts from around the world reported by NoTricksZone that show NO WARMING TRENDS.
Good luck with the new web site. I worry about the moves to censorship and the loss of free speech.
Suggestion for an article in the future. Science education vs belief in catastrophic anthropomorphic global warming. What gave me the idea was Will’s recent article on the simple mathematics of either cost or land area required to replace fossil fuels.
Saw a brief study on this years ago, I think the intent was to show how dumb skeptics were, instead it showed skeptics were better educated and better informed, particularly in science.
Need ‘doomsday failures’ section . . .
Anthony, it is a good idea, I hope it works in waking up people..
Reading through the first page though, I am afraid that it will only appeal to people already convinced the climate change noise is wrong, i.e. , preaching to the converted., The summaries are biased towards what we know as the truth, but it does not show what you want
“The idea behind EC is to cover specific climate topics in a pro and con way, so that people can examine and compare, and hopefully make up their own minds”
The introductory paragraphs should be like that, to attract people wanting to know the facts to read on, without a judgement before a read of the facts..
Dear AW and CR,
It’s now been four days since the Announcement. EC has grown and is getting better and better. I think maybe you didn’t need all the advice in this thread — you knew exactly what you were doing and why all along.
It’s a lovely and worthy addition to the “debate” (or should we call it a Meme War?). Quick hitting, short and to the point, covering all the bases, easy to understand, plenty of references for further study. Well done (so far, there’s more to do).
Thank you. Will spread the link to my friends.
And I will chip in some more. Somebody has to pay for this, and I don’t mind if I do. Money well spent, compared to many of my extravagances. All you who benefit, please be generous.
Given the recent attack on the US Capital by armed mobs and high alert levels by government security services it is inappropriate to fan the flames of anti-democracy and fascism by using the work “war” in this context. I suggest “high urgency” instead or something like it.
Surely you aren’t actually suggesting killing people (I hope).
While this dataset will be of value for sharing with “believers”, the dataset of choice of many Americans and governmental administrations is NASA/NOAA. I took note of this interaction during the Amy Coney Barrett confirmation hearings:
Senator Harris: (02:33:39)
………… If a case that comes before you would require you to consider scientific evidence, my question is will you defer to scientists and those with expertise in the relevant issues before rendering a judgment?
Amy Coney Barrett: (02:34:14)
If a case comes before me involving environmental regulation, I will certainly apply all applicable law deferring when the law requires me to. And as I’m sure you know, Senator Harris, the Administrative Procedure Act does require courts to defer to agency fact finding and to agency regulations when they’re supported by substantial evidence. [crosstalk 02:34:36]
Senator Harris: (02:34:36)
Yes.
Amy Coney Barrett: (02:34:37)
So, yes, I would apply that law and defer when the law requires me to defer.
Amy Coney Barrett Senate Confirmation Hearing Day 3 Transcript – Rev
As long as we tolerate NASA/NOAA and other government agencies promotion of alarmist science, most of which is supported by a flimsy peer review process, much of which fails to meet OMB Quality Assurance requirements, this information set will proide limited benefit. I doubt if the Administration Procedure Act allows courts to defer to “Everything Climate”.
Menne et al (2010) features prominantly http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ushcn/station-siting after misusing information developed by Anthony Watts and the surfacestations.org study. Whose data will a court defer to?
Peer review is the lowest level of quality control and it’s abuse by NASA/NOAA and IPCC will ensure we will suffer the abuses of Climate Crisis alarmists in the current administration.
We should focus on challenging Federal Governments agencies abuse of OMB mandated quality assurance requirements of their science. I believe the output of models and the whole of the IPCC reports would fail.