What it is like to be a climate realist

Some people like the herd mentality, it gives them a feeling of fitting in, or belonging. It also saves them the trouble of having to think for themselves.

Definition of herd mentality

the tendency of the people in a group to think and behave in ways that conform with others in the group rather than as individuals

Such is the case with many climate change proponents, who think they are morally anointed with holy oils because they are “saving the planet”.

Me, I’m all about facts and essential oils, like petroleum. Without it, not of you would be reading this article.

4.7 49 votes
Article Rating
185 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
richardw
June 18, 2021 10:49 pm

Very true – describes the situation and the isolation many feel in challenging the narrative perfectly. Someone made me think yesterday that we need to wake up every morning, put our armour on, then go out and tell the truth. I have often failed to put on my armour which means I have been vulnerable to those who try to deny my truth.

Alexy Scherbakoff
Reply to  richardw
June 18, 2021 10:54 pm

I don’t preach. I don’t need armour.

Last edited 1 month ago by Alexy Scherbakoff
richardw
Reply to  Alexy Scherbakoff
June 19, 2021 12:21 am

I don’t preach. I argue for rational debate, and try to identify narratives that are not open to such debate. Speaking like this does expose you to attack because many of us are threatened by reason that challenges the way we think. Hence the need for armour. I find the image useful; maybe you don’t.

Alexy Scherbakoff
Reply to  richardw
June 19, 2021 12:42 am

I’m far from an AGWer. I’m just questioning the success rate you might have with your method. The armour bit gave me an image of you being ready for a fight. My technique would be that of an assassin, rather than a frontal assault. I would undermine their belief in the media in general without mentioning AGW stuff in particular. Once doubt creeps in about their source of information, I would then proceed with my cunning plan.
No one will listen to you if they think you’re a nutter.

J N
Reply to  Alexy Scherbakoff
June 19, 2021 4:51 am

So true…

Addolff
Reply to  Alexy Scherbakoff
June 19, 2021 5:08 am

“It is usually futile to try to talk facts and analysis to people who are enjoying a sense of moral superiority in their ignorance.”
-Thomas Sowell

MarkW
Reply to  Alexy Scherbakoff
June 19, 2021 8:34 am

Armor is for defense, and you need a lot of that when going up against the mob.

Alexy Scherbakoff
Reply to  MarkW
June 19, 2021 5:47 pm

Why do you place yourself in that danger?

MarkW
Reply to  Alexy Scherbakoff
June 19, 2021 7:54 pm

Either place your self in that danger, or just go with the flow and agree with everything the alarmists tell you to do.

Alexy Scherbakoff
Reply to  MarkW
June 19, 2021 8:11 pm

I don’t go with the flow on various things. I also don’t follow what alarmists tell me to do. I’m also unlikely to listen to people who feel I should think like them. People don’t like to be told that their decision-making process is faulty. Unless, of course, you want to alienate them.

zack aa
Reply to  Alexy Scherbakoff
June 21, 2021 4:29 pm

ez

Ellen
Reply to  Alexy Scherbakoff
June 19, 2021 10:25 am

True, and not true. There have been times being a nutter has worked for me — it can get through to the most impassioned believer. They may not change their minds, but they’ll leave me alone. (This works better on old or indolent believers.)

Richard (the cynical one)
Reply to  richardw
June 19, 2021 6:12 am

Your imagery, though eminently useful and appropriate, may induce a negative response in some (or a positive one in others) because it echoes a particular and well known passage of Scripture. It would be ironic if those responses are indications of another form of groupthink.

Red94ViperRT10
Reply to  Richard (the cynical one)
June 19, 2021 12:25 pm

It may well be appropriate. I found myself deleting comments I had posted to LinkedIn, because of how it could affect not only any future prospects, but my (then) current position as well.

Alexy Scherbakoff
Reply to  Red94ViperRT10
June 19, 2021 5:49 pm

In some situations, it’s safer to keep your opinions to yourself.

MarkW
Reply to  Alexy Scherbakoff
June 19, 2021 7:56 pm

Keeping your opinion to yourself, just means the alarmists win.

Alexy Scherbakoff
Reply to  MarkW
June 19, 2021 8:01 pm

Win the argument and lose your job.

MarkW
Reply to  Alexy Scherbakoff
June 19, 2021 8:33 am

1) Who said anything about preaching?
2) Telling people that they must obey the consensus sounds a lot more like preaching.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  MarkW
June 19, 2021 10:13 am

“Consensus” is just another way of expressing the notion of ‘The Revealed Word‘.

Tom Foley
Reply to  richardw
June 18, 2021 11:10 pm

I am glad you wrote ‘my truth’. In most situations, everybody believes that they are the ones who know ‘the’ truth, and that people who think differently are suffering from herd mentality. This human tendency is currently exhibited by both sides of the climate change debate.

I am prepared to make one prediction – in ca 50 years time, there will be a swathe of books, articles, PhD theses etc analysing why each side thought the way they did, how they defended their truth, and whether it made any difference to the way the world developed. However, I’ll leave it up to all the debaters to predict whether these will be written in houses on the current shoreline or on mountain tops.

Last edited 1 month ago by Tom Foley
Michael in Dublin
Reply to  Tom Foley
June 19, 2021 12:42 am

If what you say is true of both sides why is it that I find the most outrageous claims by those pushing the climate alarmism but sober and careful reasoning by those who dissent with the imminence of catastrophic climate changes?

Oldseadog
Reply to  Michael in Dublin
June 19, 2021 2:31 am

Because those pushing the climate alarmism are afraid to admit they are wrong, although many of them now think that, but if they admit it their jobs will disappear.

Tom Foley
Reply to  Michael in Dublin
June 19, 2021 9:06 am

That sums it up well. Each side thinks the other is making outrageous claims while they themselves are using sober and careful reasoning.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Tom Foley
June 19, 2021 10:22 am

Each side thinks the other is making outrageous claims

However, it is well documented that one side IS “making outrageous claims” because they have a quasi religious “cause” within a sociopolitical agenda which bears no relation to the science. In order to disseminate their narrative, they employ a long list of logical fallacies specifically intended to distort the facts.

Red94ViperRT10
Reply to  Tom Foley
June 19, 2021 12:31 pm

They may well “think” that, but only because they have taken it on faith for so long. Who was it, was it Judith Curry(?), that stated they were a full-fledged AGW advocate until they actually looked into the facts, found they had been misled for a long, long time!

Reminds me of a product, a flexible tubing, called PEX that wanted to get into the residential housing market. They were making some headway until people started to notice a rash of leaks associated with this tubing. The company response was, it was simply an installation error, there’s nothing wrong with our tubing. They carried this on for many years, until one of their employees, whose sole job was to teach others how to make those connections, was challenged one-day to repeatedly make leak-proof connections in a row. By number 4, he already had one leaking. It took him nearly a week of experimentation, I think, to finally determine that even he, the teacher on such, could not make consistent leak-proof connections. It was the fault of the tubing.

Crispin Pemberton-Pigott
Reply to  Red94ViperRT10
June 19, 2021 3:30 pm

“My truth” about PEX installation is different. I have never had a leak with PEX, save on occasions when I opened a sealed connection (removed the pipe) and put it back again. Sometimes it was possible to get a leak. The solution is the same as push-in 1/4″ air pipe leaks: trim off 3/4″ of the pipe with a very sharp knife and re-insert.

However, I do like that story and there are dozens to go with it. One is the predictions of weather disasters based on global circulation models: always dripping facts and fiddles and guesses in the middle.

mikebartnz
Reply to  Red94ViperRT10
June 19, 2021 10:20 pm

We had a problem here in NZ with push fit fittings where a lot of people would push them together until they felt one click but wouldn’t carry on for the second. I don’t know why people have a problem with RTFM.
Whenever I use something new or haven’t used it for a while I always scim the manual.

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  Tom Foley
June 19, 2021 4:01 am

“everybody believes that they are the ones who know ‘the’ truth”

scientists should be the most skeptical of all people including their own work

activists are the least skeptical- worse than religeous fanatics- at least the religeous fanatic will say they’re inspired by God or some scripture- activists think they’re inspired by their personal genius

Voltron
Reply to  Tom Foley
June 19, 2021 4:13 am

Francis Bacon said it best – Man prefers to believe what they prefer to be true

Gregory Woods
Reply to  Tom Foley
June 19, 2021 4:14 am

I will leave it to Reality to write the last book. (I will be long gone by then)…

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  Tom Foley
June 19, 2021 6:44 am

Sorry, but my point of view about global warming/climate change/whatever they call it next week is not based on any “herd” mentality whatsoever; it is based merely on logic and reason, and I have as many differences with the skeptical as with the climate fascists and true believers (though on a smaller scale).

n.n
Reply to  richardw
June 19, 2021 6:07 am

Speak facts to truth, not handmade tales.

MarkW
Reply to  n.n
June 19, 2021 10:59 am

Hand maid tales

observa
June 18, 2021 11:06 pm

When you’re joining the mob saving the planet you want to be careful choosing your saviour to lead the herd-
Trump and Obama’s former physician writes to President Biden urging him to submit a ‘cognitive test’ (msn.com)
The lefty media won’t be capable of airbrushing this one away.

Richard Page
Reply to  observa
June 19, 2021 3:25 am

Oh, come on. The media won’t need to airbrush it away – Biden can either ignore this or label it as ‘Trumpist’ and denigrate the physician. This will just not happen unless it suits the white house and the media won’t be bothered in the slightest. There is no leverage to make this happen so why would anyone think it would be possible?

Komerade cube
Reply to  observa
June 19, 2021 1:10 pm

They don’t need to airbrush anything. They don’t care what we think.

Patrick MJD
June 18, 2021 11:08 pm

I have dealt with this all my life because I go read, watch and study scientific literature and papers whereas most people, the “herd”, follow whatever the media sells them.

Everything, you name it.

I, at 8, have even had teachers “criticize” me, in class, for doing something outside the box (Doodling a solar flare during story time).

The areas I now am more interested in being the “climate” issue and most recently COVID-19 issue. I have been on the receiving end of much critical abuse (Its OK, I have a thick skin I can take it) but I can back up my views with facts.

I would say 90% of people can’t think out side the box, accept 100% what Govn’t and media sell them, can’t look past their blinkers, many of my friends seem to have lost their critical thinking abilities. I guess they want an easy life.

Ignorance is bliss and comfortably numb.

Scissor
Reply to  Patrick MJD
June 19, 2021 5:21 am

It would be so much easier if the left would just stay out of other people’s business.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Scissor
June 19, 2021 10:36 am

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
― C. S. Lewis

Komerade cube
Reply to  Scissor
June 19, 2021 1:12 pm

They wouldn’t be liberals if they didn’t think it was their calling to tell EVERYONE ELSE what to do.

mikebartnz
Reply to  Patrick MJD
June 19, 2021 10:35 pm

Sadly I lost a friend of thirty odd years recently for that reason. He thinks it was for something else. He told me never to contact him again so I haven’t and yet he couldn’t help making a crank call while trying to disguise himself.
He ditched FB but couldn’t bear it so rejoined and follows the leftist media.
I tried to inform him how wrong he was about something and he just went off the deep end. I am inclined to think he wasn’t that much of a friend to begin with.

TheLastDemocrat
Reply to  mikebartnz
June 21, 2021 8:26 am

If you loan someone $20 and never hear from them again, that was probably a well-spent $20.

mikebartnz
Reply to  TheLastDemocrat
June 21, 2021 11:35 pm

I love the humour in that and it has happened to me so I think it is probably quite true.

Mike Dubrasich
June 18, 2021 11:34 pm

I feel the same way. Some (or most) of my friends and family are “believers of convenience” who go along to get along. It takes more than intelligence to buck the tide; it takes strength, patience, self-confidence, and a genuine concern for others.

I’m glad you have those traits, Rev. Without them we wouldn’t have this stellar website at all. KUTGW.

June 18, 2021 11:50 pm

In this new “woke” world, there is a “touchy-feely” notion that everyone can have their own truth, and that all truths re equally valid.
 
This may be acceptable for inconsequential opinions – such as “did you like this movie, this coffee, this car, etc.”
 
It is simply not valid for important scientific and technical issues, which have real and significant outcomes for the quality and safety of our lives.
 
For example, you cannot have a dead-wrong “woke” opinion on climate-and-energy (“Save the Planet from Global Warming”, etc.), because the consequence is loss of prosperity and more importantly, loss of lives.
 
Because our corrupt, imbecilic fearless-leaders have got climate-and-energy all wrong, we have wasted trillions of dollars of scarce global resources, and harmed or killed millions of innocent people.
 
Cheap, abundant reliable energy is the lifeblood of society – it IS that simple! When idiot politicians fool with energy systems, real people suffer and die.
 
[ To be continued…]

Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
June 19, 2021 3:33 am

[continued]

THE WARMISTS HAVE A PERFECT RECORD OF FAILED PREDICTIONS – THUS NEGATIVE CREDIBILITY
 
The ability to correctly predict outcomes is the best objective test of scientific and technical competence.
 
Climate doomsters have a perfect NEGATIVE predictive track record – every very-scary climate prediction, of the ~80 they have made since 1970, has FAILED TO HAPPEN. Some of these scary climate events are predicted for the future, but fully 48 passed their due date by end 2020 – these predictions are expired – failed.
 
“Rode and Fischbeck, professor of Social & Decision Sciences and Engineering & Public Policy, collected 79 predictions of climate-caused apocalypse going back to the first Earth Day in 1970. With the passage of time, many of these forecasts have since expired; the dates have come and gone uneventfully. In fact, 48 (61%) of the predictions have already expired as of the end of 2020.”
 
To end 2020, the climate doomsters were proved wrong in their scary climate predictions 48 times – at 50:50 odds for each prediction, that’s like flipping a coin 48 times and losing every time! The probability of that being mere random stupidity is 1 in 281 trillion! It’s not just global warming scientists being stupid.
 
These climate doomsters were not telling the truth – they displayed a dishonest bias in their analyses that caused these extremely improbable falsehoods, these frauds.
 
There is a powerful logic that says no rational person or group could be this wrong, this obtuse, for this long – they followed a corrupt agenda – in fact, they knew they were lying from the start.
 
The global warming alarmists have a NO predictive track record – they have been 100% wrong about every scary climate prediction – nobody should believe them.
 
The radical greens have NO credibility, make that NEGATIVE credibility – their core competence is propaganda, the fabrication of false alarm – wolves stampeding the sheep.
 
The wolves, proponents of both the very-scary Global Warming / Climate Change scam and the Covid-19 Lockdown scam, know they are lying. Note also how many global “leaders” quickly linked the two scams, stating ”to solve Covid we have to solve Climate Change”- utter nonsense, not even plausible enough to be specious.
 
Regarding the sheep, especially those who inhabit our universities and governments:
The sheep are well-described by Nassim Nicholas Taleb, author of the landmark text “The Black Swan”, as “Intellectual-Yet-Idiot” or IYI – IYI’s hold the warmist views as absolute truths, without ever having spent sufficient effort to investigate them. The false warmist narrative fitted their worldview, and they never seriously questioned it by examining the contrary evidence.
 
[ To be continued…]

Last edited 1 month ago by ALLAN MACRAE
Herbert
Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
June 19, 2021 2:36 pm

Allan,
On failed predictions, go to The Extinction Clock at extinctionclock.org.
You will see a fabulous collection of failed predictions since 1970 by all the usual suspects,Al Gore, John Kerry, Tim Flannery,Prince Charles etc.
Where the prediction date has passed the fail rate is a perfect 100%.
But one of my favourites is missing.I will write to them to have it added-
Beto O’Rourke- Keokuk,Iowa High School-2019.-
“This is our final chance.The scientists are absolutely unanimous on this.That we have no more than 12 years to take incredibly bold action on this crisis”.
That is the kind version of his address.
Another reported version is-
“If we do not abolish all fossil fuels within 12 years, everything on this planet will be dead.The scientists are 100% united on this.Just as Americans of the past had to fight at Normandy,we have to fight this now and save our planet.”
The “12 years to save the planet”is now established urban myth with many youngsters and some ‘oldsters’.
Perhaps this second version is apocryphal and I will submit the first version but roll on 2030!

Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
June 20, 2021 4:33 am

[continued]

Note to the corrupt, idiot leaders of the G7 countries:
 
Don’t worry about your fictitious 1.5C of global warming – it’s not going to happen.
 
Earth is getting colder due to low solar activity, just as we correctly predicted in 2002.
 
You criminal imbeciles are going to have to dream up another false scam to stampede your sheep. How about Covid-19?

CLIMATE CHANGE, COVID-19, AND THE GREAT RESET
A CLIMATE, ENERGY AND COVID PRIMER FOR POLITICIANS AND MEDIA
By Allan M.R. MacRae, May 8, 2021 UPDATE 1e
Download the WORD file
https://thsresearch.files.wordpress.com/2021/05/climate-change-covid-19-and-the-great-reset-update-1e-readonly.docx
[excerpt]
This treatise was originally sent to Canadian and American politicians and the media in March 2021. Most of them won’t understand it, because they have no scientific competence and have been utterly duped – programmed for decades by false climate scares and green energy frauds.
This update was written in May 2021 to report even more global cooling as measured by satellites and new harsh cold events, particularly in Europe and North America that have severely harmed early crops. Harsh cold events have struck all countries in the Northern and Southern Hemispheres.

SUMMARY

We published in 2002 that there was NO catastrophic human-made global warming /climate change crisis, and green energy schemes were NOT green and produced little useful (dispatchable) energy. Dangerous global warming and climate change have NOT HAPPENED and green energy schemes have proved to be COSTLY, UNRELIABLE AND INEFFECTIVE.

Global warming is NOT a threat, but global cooling IS dangerous to humanity and the environment. In 2002 we predicted that natural global cooling would start circa 2020, based on low solar activity, and that prediction is strongly supported by recent evidence.
 
Politicians foolishly believed scary global warming falsehoods and brewed the perfect storm, crippling our energy systems with costly and unreliable green energy schemes that utterly fail due to intermittency, at a time when we need more cheap, reliable, dispatchable energy due to increased energy demand and imminent global cooling. The people of Australia, Britain, Germany, California, Texas and elsewhere have all suffered due to GREEN ENERGY FAILURES THAT WERE PREDICTABLE AND WERE PREDICTED.
 
We published in March 2020 that there was no justification for the Covid-19 lockdown, and that it would cause great and needless harm. The Covid-19 lockdown is now estimated to have caused 10-to-100-times the damage of the Covid-19 illness, in terms of increased harm to individuals, families and the economies they depend on.
 
The same leftist groups concocted and promoted the global warming fraud and the Covid-19 lockdown scam, for political and financial gain. Then these groups linked the two frauds, stating “to solve Covid-19 we have to solve Climate Change” – utterly false and foolish, not even plausible enough to be specious. Then these same groups proposed their Final Solution, the “Great Reset”, a Chinese Communist Party style dictatorship, a centrally-controlled economy where we live like poor slaves, lorded over by our wealthy political masters.
 
The tragic reality is that the twin frauds of Climate-and-Covid have been accepted by most politicians. Some have covertly or overtly embraced extreme-left politics, and others are so simple-minded and gullible that they believe any falsehood that is repeated often enough. We are governed by scoundrels and imbeciles.
Addenda: The grape crops in France and Germany are reportedly gone – frozen out. NOT global warming.

MORE EXTREME-COLD EVENTS are recorded by Cap Allon at https://electroverse.net/category/extreme-weather/

Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
June 20, 2021 5:04 am

OT but IMPORTANT – COVID WAS MILITARY BIOWEAPON

Hi Jo and thank you for your email and this post.
RUMOR: TOP CHINESE SECRET SERVICE MAN DEFECTED — SAYS COVID WAS MILITARY BIOWEAPON
https://joannenova.com.au/2021/06/rumor-top-chinese-secret-service-man-defected-says-covid-was-military-bioweapon/#comment-2435957
 
REPEATING FROM MY FIRST EMAIL TO YOU – I CONCLUDED THAT COVID-19 DID NOT JUMP – IT WAS PUSHED.
 
Nailed it again.
 
Regards, Allan
 
From: Allan MacRae
Sent: June-16-21 8:24 AM
To: Jo Nova
Subject: RE: How to tell what’s true?
[excerpt]
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/06/13/betrayers-of-the-truth/#comment-3269058
 
The gross mismanagement of the false Covid-19 pandemic since January 2020 cannot be simply ascribed to incompetence by government and health authorities.
 
I knew about the Dr Fauci involvement about one year ago – he originated the gain-of-function virus research and offshored it to Wuhan when it was declared illegal in the USA. But the lockdown scam is global-scale – much bigger than just Dr Fauci.
 
A year ago I concluded that the Covid-19 virus originated from the Wuhan lab and not at the wet market. The only question then was “did the virus jump from the Wuhan lab, or was it pushed?”
 
BASED ON ALL THE DYSTOPIAN EVENTS SINCE THEN, THE RATIONAL CONCLUSION IS THAT THE VIRUS DID NOT ESCAPE, BUT WAS PUSHED OUT OF THE LAB – DELIBERATELY RELEASED FOR POLITICAL AND FINANCIAL GAIN.
___________

bill Johnston
Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
June 20, 2021 7:12 pm

It was possibly Yogi Berra who opined “It is difficult to make predictions, especially about the future”.

MarkW
Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
June 19, 2021 8:47 am

Liberals talk about there being multiple truths because they know they can’t defend their version of the truth. So the have to drag down real truth to their level so they don’t have to.
Another thing is that liberals only believe in multiple truths when they are out of power. The minute they get power, there truth becomes the only truth and if you don’t worship with them, you will be made to suffer.

Red94ViperRT10
Reply to  MarkW
June 19, 2021 12:37 pm

I wouldn’t have so much problem with everyone having their own “truth” (as oxymoronic as that is) as long as I’m not expected to pay for other peoples’ “truth”. As already noted, the liberals want their to be multiple “truths” into they get power, then they rapidly set about imposing their “truth” on everyone.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
June 19, 2021 10:44 am

notion that everyone can have their own truth, and that all truths re equally valid.

Like so much in our post modern “reality” the notion of a personal “truth” is merely another example of taking control of the language to heighten ambiguity. They have done no less than conflate ‘truth’ with opinion … elevating the status of opinion. Our language is under attack, not just our science.

Coeur de Lion
June 18, 2021 11:53 pm

Whenever I raise the issue of climate change credibility among my friends, I get “but all these people, all these institutions, all these scientists, even the Royal Society and the Met Office – are you telling me there’s a conspiracy? I don’t believe it “

KAT
Reply to  Coeur de Lion
June 19, 2021 1:34 am

“but all these people, all these institutions, all these scientists,….”

 

Point out to your incredulous friends the example of a multiplicity of different religions, each with billions of adherents, all believing explicitly in their version of “absolute truth”. 

These believers are representative of all walks of life ie engineers, scientists, doctors, chemists, teachers, etc.

Are they all wrong or are only certain groups correct. If so – to what degree?

What may be deduced without question – is that billions of seemingly intelligent and well educated people – hold contradictory views and at the same time they are absolutely convinced that their beliefs are correct to the exclusion of others.

ARGUMENTUM AD POPULEM

This fallacy occurs any time the sheer numbers of people who agree to something is used as a reason to get you to agree to it and takes the general form: When most people agree on a claim about subject S, the claim is true (normally an unstated premise). Claim X is one which most people agree on. Therefore X is true!

Reply to  Coeur de Lion
June 19, 2021 1:39 am

ARGUMENTUM AD POPULEM

This fallacy occurs any time the sheer numbers of people who agree to something is used as a reason to get you to agree to it and takes the general form: When most people agree on a claim about subject S, the claim is true (normally an unstated premise). Claim X is one which most people agree on

I call them in homage to Kipling, the Bandar Log

“No sooner had he walked to the city wall than the monkeys pulled him back, telling him that he did not know how happy he was, and pinching him to make him grateful. He set his teeth and said nothing, but went with the shouting monkeys to a terrace above the red sandstone reservoirs that were half-full of rain water. There was a ruined summer-house of white marble in the center of the terrace, built for queens dead a hundred years ago. The domed roof had half fallen in and blocked up the underground passage from the palace by which the queens used to enter. But the walls were made of screens of marble tracery–beautiful milk-white fretwork, set with agates and cornelians and jasper and lapis lazuli, and as the moon came up behind the hill it shone through the open work, casting shadows on the ground like black velvet embroidery. Sore, sleepy, and hungry as he was, Mowgli could not help laughing when the Bandar-log began, twenty at a time, to tell him how great and wise and strong and gentle they were, and how foolish he was to wish to leave them. “We are great. We are free. We are wonderful. We are the most wonderful people in all the jungle! We all say so, and so it must be true,” they shouted. “Now as you are a new listener and can carry our words back to the Jungle-People so that they may notice us in future, we will tell you all about our most excellent selves.” Mowgli made no objection, and the monkeys gathered by hundreds and hundreds on the terrace to listen to their own speakers singing the praises of the Bandar-log, and whenever a speaker stopped for want of breath they would all shout together: “This is true; we all say so.” Mowgli nodded and blinked, and said “Yes” when they asked him a question, and his head spun with the noise. “Tabaqui the Jackal must have bitten all these people,” he said to himself, “and now they have madness. Certainly this is dewanee, the madness. Do they never go to sleep? Now there is a cloud coming to cover that moon. If it were only a big enough cloud I might try to run away in the darkness. But I am tired.”

Apropos of nothing much, Kipling was an acute judge of human nature.

Whenever I think of AgitProp – and Climate change is AgitProp, backed by commercial interests I think of this chapter from ‘Stalky & Co’…

…enjoy…

Oldseadog
Reply to  Leo Smith
June 19, 2021 2:35 am

Brilliant. Bandar Log it is from now on.

bonbon
Reply to  Leo Smith
June 19, 2021 3:48 am

Curiously Putin quotes Kipling, see Pepe Escobar’s report :
Putin Rewrites the Law of the Geopolitical Jungle — Strategic Culture (strategic-culture.org)

griff
Reply to  Coeur de Lion
June 19, 2021 1:51 am

Well lots of posters on skeptic websites do tell me EXACTLY that: if not a conspiracy, it is some ‘leftist’ idea that groups of infiltrating leftists are forcing on the world for their own nefarious socialist ends…

Mr.
Reply to  griff
June 19, 2021 8:25 am

Start your agw history insight by reading up on The Club Of Rome.

MarkW
Reply to  griff
June 19, 2021 8:52 am

How dare we believe them when they state what their goals are.

Last edited 1 month ago by MarkW
Rory Forbes
Reply to  griff
June 19, 2021 10:59 am

it is some ‘leftist’ idea that groups of infiltrating leftists are forcing on the world for their own nefarious socialist ends…

That is precisely what is happening. Few people are aware that they are acting as “useful idiots”, but it’s obvious that is exactly what they are. Like the devil’s trick of deceiving people that he doesn’t exist, the Left have been doing the same thing for generations … gaslighting skeptics into believing the “consensus”. Anyone who has read Orwell knows this.

Reply to  Coeur de Lion
June 19, 2021 5:24 am

It is a social and political movement, radical environmentalism, so not a conspiracy but with many similar characteristic. Most liberal institutions have adopted it, especially the press, academic research and the liberal part of government. In liberal countries this is most of government.

Everything we see follows from these simple facts. The scale is similar to where communism was 100 years ago, and just as dangerous.

Reply to  Coeur de Lion
June 19, 2021 7:01 am

“Whenever I raise the issue of climate change credibility among my friends ..,”

Even more disturbing is that they don’t even want to hear the evidence, especially partisan California Democrats who have embraced the lies to such an extent that the truth has become an existential threat to their politics. If the minions were to learn how wrong their Marxist leaders are about climate change, they might start to question some of the other policies being pushed by these anti-freedom crusaders. Especially considering that many on the left consider the climate change issue to be their most supportable cause.

Steve Case
Reply to  Coeur de Lion
June 19, 2021 7:47 am

The original 2009 Doran/Zimmerman study that came up with the 97% basically asked these two survey questions:

Q1. When compared with pre-1800’s levels, do you think that mean global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant?

Q2. Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?

My response to your friends who say, “but all these people, all these institutions …” is, “Why didn’t Doran & Zimmerman find 100% instead of just 97%? Who were the 3% who didn’t think average global temperatures are up since 1800? And who didn’t think human activity doesn’t affect temperature?” And then point out to your friends that the Doran & Zimmerman survey didn’t ask if they thought increasing global temperature would constitute a problem, not to mention the existential crisis of our time!

One survey question

         Do you think a warmer world is a problem?

would probably probably produce way less than the 97% we constantly hear about. That Doran & Zimmerman didn’t ask that question directly is an indication that they knew the result would go against the narrative they were looking to support. In other words, their survey was propaganda, and not a search for truth.

Last edited 1 month ago by Steve Case
MarkW
Reply to  Steve Case
June 19, 2021 8:54 am

The other problem with that survey is that they didn’t define what they meant by “significant”. In statistics significant can mean anything that isn’t trivial. In other words, as little as 5% can be significant.

Red94ViperRT10
Reply to  MarkW
June 19, 2021 12:54 pm

Well clearly I’m not a statistician. I’m an engineer. To me, it’s not significant until it gets well beyond 50%. So, if I had been surveyed by the D&Z survey, my responses would have been, “We can’t tell.” and “NO!”. So there.

TonyG
Reply to  MarkW
June 19, 2021 4:38 pm

and we still haven’t touched on the post-response filtering that led to that 97 number.

mikebartnz
Reply to  Steve Case
June 19, 2021 10:59 pm

I can’t remember the exact numbers now but there was actually way more to that Zimmerman study than you put there because of the 3,000 odd replies she got that was whittled down to 79 and that doesn’t take into account the many that didn’t reply. It wasn’t scientific at all.
When it comes to someone ringing me up with a political survey I always tell lies. I say the opposite just to screw up their survey.

TonyG
Reply to  mikebartnz
June 20, 2021 8:45 am

Something like 10,000 sent out, 3000-ish returned, then various filters applied after the fact until it got down to 79. It was written up here several years ago.

Vincent Causey
June 19, 2021 12:10 am

I can’t see the appeal, myself, of wanting to think like everybody else.

Chaswarnertoo
Reply to  Vincent Causey
June 19, 2021 12:39 am

Cos most of ‘em is fick.

Reply to  Vincent Causey
June 19, 2021 1:43 am

It takes an enormous strain out of life. It enables one to have a social life.

Most people really do not want to do the hard work of ‘figuring stuff out’ for themselves,. They want to be taught what to think, what to say, and how to behave, so that they can get on with their lives without feeling socially isolated and shunned.

Observer
Reply to  Leo Smith
June 19, 2021 7:59 am

Public Choice Theorists talk about “rational ignorance” – basically, it makes sense to remain uninformed on complex or uninteresting matters that you have absolutely no ability to change.

People tend to be tribal; they congregate with those of similar attitudes and beliefs. Questioning those beliefs takes effort and might lead to being ostracised; why bother?

Ben Vorlich
Reply to  Vincent Causey
June 19, 2021 2:19 am

A large chunk of the population want to be associated with winning. In the UK, and England in particular you can make a pretty good guess at someone’s age by the football team they support if it isn’t local to where they were born or grew up. Manchester Utd 1950-7,1960s,1985-2010,Liverpool 1975-85, Chelsea 2000-5, Manchester City 2004-present.
Arsenal a bit like Man U with several periods co ered. 1960s to 1990s but very few born post 2005.
Wales will follow the English pattern, in Scot the division between the Old Firm is almost exclusive religious.

Mike Lowe
Reply to  Ben Vorlich
June 19, 2021 4:22 am

I’ve followed Chelsea since 1947. Now I know why – many thanks! It’s quite enjoyable being a contrarian, whether on CAGW, Covid “vaccines”, or disbelieving our red P.M.’s lies.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Ben Vorlich
June 19, 2021 5:51 am

Years ago I went to a ‘restaurant’ in Southern California. They served pre-Medieval era food with large steins of beer. The seats were above, and clustered around, a large open area where jousting and sword fighting took place to entertain the customers.

The announcer came out before the major event and told those on one side that they were supposed to root for the ‘Red Knight’ and the other side to root for the ‘Black Knight.’ Within minutes, each side was yelling support for their designated ‘hero’ as though they were an old friend or family member. I marveled that they could so quickly get so emotionally involved with a complete stranger!

There seems to be a tribal instinct to unquestioningly support a leader or figure head!

Gary Pearse
Reply to  Ben Vorlich
June 19, 2021 6:16 am

Possession of all of Apple’s stuff despite highly inflated prices is a good indicator of wokeness. It’s easy to understand as the same thing as belonging to the thought-free, touchy-feely connectedness of a herd. Probably wearing of certain brands, eating some crunchy 19 grain gravel with with an unpronounceable umlauty name ….

Red94ViperRT10
Reply to  Vincent Causey
June 19, 2021 1:09 pm

I have come to realize, even when I “follow the crowd” I’m not a very good follower. Upon hearing that all the CO2 mankind has (re)released into the atmosphere through our burning of fossil fuels may cause the world to warm, I recall feeling somewhat bemused. Because here’s the thing, I count the industrial revolution from the invention of the steam engine, about 1753(?) and we have been obsessively burning energy ever since! so it took us some 250 years of putting CO2 into the atmosphere to even get us to this point, and I don’t see a great deal of difference compared to anecdotal recollections of the mid-18th century, but since it took us 250 years to get to hear, it would probably take at least that long to unwind it (without wanton execution of at least 90% of the population) so whatever affect it might have had, we might as well get used to it, we sure as hell aren’t going to “cure” it. And that was that, I hardly gave it another thought. Like I said, I’m not a very good follower even when I “follow”.

Until I attended a conference in 2008 regarding facility energy consumption (that’s what I do) and the keynote speaker at the end of it (I sure wish I had recorded his name) started out by telling us, “The debate is over! The Science™ (and yes, I could hear that “trademark” in his punctuation) is settled!” That was 2 red flags, right there. And then he said, “You don’t need to Google, or whatever, “global warming”, everything you need to know is right here…” and then he gave the web address to Gavin Schmidt’s propaganda site. That was 3 red flags, I knew I had to research this, this “global warming” or whatever.

Amazingly enough, when I finally did begin research a few months later, one of the first things I did (besides Google, which back then auto-completed “global warm…” with “global warming scam”, that led me to WUWT), I really did check out Gavin’s propaganda. I went to blog posts by author, and picked Gavin Schmidt’s name since it was the only one I knew, and his latest post, at that time, included in the middle of it, something along the lines of (I’m paraphrasing since I didn’t save a copy) “…we know global warming is happening, all the models and thought experiments and etc. tell us that must be true, but we don’t find any warming in our data. So the data must be wrong. And don’t worry, we have somebody working on that.” So I also knew that not only was the whole scam a scam, but those most invested in it were frantically attempting to cover up the false-hoods, to “hide the decline”!

Last edited 1 month ago by Red94ViperRT10
Peta of Newark
June 19, 2021 12:39 am

And The Herd know that they are wrong, they know what is holding it together and they know how to fix it/themselves.

Use Unreliable Energy, to break the (positively fed-back) loop of hysterical MSM, anti-social media and the widespread dissemination of Wild Speculation, Fantasy and Junk Science.

Switch it all off.

  • remove the stress
  • remove the fear
  • remove the guilt induction
  • remove the coercion
  • remove the political correctness & patronising
  • give people their lives back

For 10 or 12 hours per day, at random times and let people rediscover themselves, their own minds and those of others.

MarkH
June 19, 2021 12:43 am

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be “cured” against one’s will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals”
– C.S. Lewis

There are a good number of those who truly believe that they are doing what they do “for everyone’s own good”. Scarier are the ones who know full well that they are only pursuing these goals as a way to hold as much power over as many as is possible.

Waza
June 19, 2021 1:13 am

Group ink vs individualism is just one small piece of the puzzle.

IMO there are many players involved in The tangled web of climate alarmism.
The worst player is the Marxist academic.
They don’t care about climate change, the environment, minority groups or gender equity.
The MO is to create a victim and a perpetrator and then drive a wedge between the two. They then market themselves as the saviour.

The man in the street wants to be in the victim group.

Paul Jenkinson
Reply to  Waza
June 19, 2021 4:45 am

It is a Marxist utopian play as if Marx was orchestrating it! Marxists only concern themselves with control.

Steve B
June 19, 2021 1:15 am

Also called Collectivism.

Barnes Moore
June 19, 2021 1:20 am

“It is usually futile to argue facts and analysis with people who are enjoying a moral sense of superiority in their ignorance”. Thomas Sowell

Chris
June 19, 2021 1:24 am

As theist who believes there is a creative intelligent mind behind the existence of life, our planet and the cosmos; it is easy to get up each day and marvel at how extraordinary life is and that it is driven and sustained by the very gas people are fearful of. If you have been taught to base your world view on billions of mathematical improbabilities and you have neither the knowledge nor the understanding to appreciate that Co2 is our friend then you would look to the security of the like minded herd where your fears and anxieties are replicated and understood.

Personally I would like to see the Carbon cycle drummed into every childs’ mind like tables so that they understand that the very soil they are standing on gives off CO2 every day, that dormant volcanoes give off Co2 ( only 5 are monitored but could be many more) and scary CH4 is broken down and rebonded with oxygen to form CO2 and H2O.

griff
Reply to  Chris
June 19, 2021 1:50 am

Well of course: but surely we need to tell them what happens when a huge amount of human produced CO2 is dumped into the atmosphere on top of the carbon cycle’s operation?

Editor
Reply to  griff
June 19, 2021 7:20 am

You and many Climate are bad sycophants make this argument without evidence, that is why there are many and growing number of Climate realists who thinks you are a couple pages short of evidence.

Last edited 1 month ago by Sunsettommy
mikebartnz
Reply to  Sunsettommy
June 19, 2021 11:45 pm

Or a sandwich short of a picnic.

Sara
Reply to  Sunsettommy
June 20, 2021 3:56 am

Poor ol’ griff still doesn’t get the connection between a warm atmosphere with plenty of precipitation and a plentiful supply of food, never mind a reasonably pleasant place to live.
The real question is would griffy be happier if we found ourselves facing longer and longer winters and shorter & shorter growing seasons? Just askin’, because that means less agriculture production and higher costs for food and heat, just to be able to be somewhat comfortable.

MarkW
Reply to  griff
June 19, 2021 9:00 am

History has shown us that varying the level of CO2 in the atmosphere has precious little impact on the climate. Not just history over the last 200 years, but history going back millions of years.

That climate models disagree with history, is not proof that history is wrong.

Dave Fair
Reply to  griff
June 19, 2021 10:10 am

So far, all we can tell them is that Man’s contribution to increasing CO2 levels in our atmosphere might have contributed in some small way to the beneficial warming from the Little Ice Age. We can tell them that Man’s addition of CO2 to the atmosphere has resulted in a significant greening of the globe. We can tell them that Man’s addition of noncondensing GHGs to the atmosphere has had no impact on any of the adverse weather patterns naturally occurring on our planet nor has the recent natural sea level rise accelerated compared to past variations.

We can tell them that today’s estimated global temperatures are no higher than the many warming periods over the past 10 thousand years. We can tell them that the UN IPCC CliSciFi climate models are provably inaccurate and are not sufficient reason to fundamentally alter our society, economy and energy systems. We can tell them that Leftist ideology is helping the drive to move to command and control economic systems that have failed spectacularly in the past.

What would you tell them, Griff? Would you tell them that you ‘feel’ a climate collapse coming on?

Tim Spence
Reply to  griff
June 19, 2021 10:34 am

griff, it’s not the amount of CO2 is it? it’s not the magical figure that’s ideal is it?
it’s always just ‘the human caused’ amount.

You have a problem with humans not CO2

Rory Forbes
Reply to  griff
June 19, 2021 11:12 am

but surely we need to tell them

That would “surely” depend on you knowing what happens. Unfortunately you haven’t the foggiest idea, but rather go about pretending that you do. As MarkW said, there is simply no empirical evidence to support your beliefs. In fact, it’s pretty clear that the increase in CO2 has been a net benefit.

In any time frame that has significance, our planet is cooling, not warming.

Red94ViperRT10
Reply to  griff
June 19, 2021 1:15 pm

I have seen the calculations. Human contributions of CO2 into the atmosphere are way less than the uncertainty of the range of natural sources and sinks. In other words, we could cease ALL production of CO2 and still see no change in either the total quantity or the rate of change of atmospheric CO2.

TonyG
Reply to  griff
June 19, 2021 4:39 pm

Hey, griff,

How much CO2 SHOULD there be in the atmosphere? What is the correct amount?

Mark D
Reply to  TonyG
June 19, 2021 9:45 pm

And while you are at it what is earth’s correct temperature?

TimTheToolMan
Reply to  griff
June 19, 2021 5:37 pm

Perhaps the question one should ask is whether an ice age is more or less likely now?

Because we know they happen, we believe we’re just about due for one and we know what devastation that will cause.

mikebartnz
Reply to  griff
June 19, 2021 11:41 pm

Tell me Griff what happens when China builds a twenty lane highway both ways in relation to CO2’s equivalent. You have a sun absorbing material and in most cases the rain runs off rather than seeping through. You are wasting your time getting your knickers in a twist about CO2 when there is much more that could make a difference.
From what I learnt recently from a local engineer is that hot mix is slightly porous whereas tar seal isn’t and concrete definitely isn’t
In a submarine the highest they have been with CO2 is just over 11,000ppm (the ones that survived because they resurfaced) and they don’t even think of hitting the panic button until 7,000ppm.
It has also been shown that CO2 follows temperature change by about eight hundred years

Last edited 1 month ago by mikebartnz
mikebartnz
Reply to  Chris
June 19, 2021 11:23 pm

When you talk about probabilities just think of the chance you had to partake in this world.
If it hadn’t been for the second world war I wouldn’t be here as my mother was originally going to marry my fathers brother but he met his demise. I was the fourth of five children. That one sperm had to meet that one egg at that time to produce me. The odds are astronomical. Added to that my mother was almost born in Aussie rather than NZ.
The numbers get mind boggling.
People just don’t realise how very small we are.
I heard at one time that the worlds population would fit into Texas.

Steve Case
June 19, 2021 1:25 am

There was a South Korean movie Parasite that was shown in American theaters a year or so ago. The characters in the movie made fun of the North Korean media that was nothing but propaganda.

In the old USSR Russians made fun of Tass and Pravda.

So far in the United States people sit there slack jawed listening to Nora O’Donnell on CBS or whatever media talking head is on the tube during the dinner hour and for all intents and purposes, it looks like they believe everything she says.

Yesterday on Pookies Toons this one was featured:

What scares me most is 
  not the fact that our
media is lying to us, It’s 
the fact that most of you 
      believe them.

A while back, Kip Hansen wrote about The Climate Propaganda Cabal It’s not a conspiracy, it’s right out in the open for all to see.

The notion that a warmer greener world with more rain, longer growing seasons and more arable land could be sold as the existential crisis of our time is testimony to the greatest propaganda triumph the world has ever seen.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Steve Case
June 19, 2021 10:17 am

Under the auspices of the Columbia School of Journalism and Leftist donors, huge swaths of MSM practitioners have openly joined to produce coordinated and relentless extremist climate propaganda for all media outlets. I think that such hubris will be their downfall. Pravda became an open joke.

Red94ViperRT10
Reply to  Dave Fair
June 19, 2021 1:20 pm

Our own Main Stream Media is laughed at daily by a significant portion of this (United States) population. At least 75 million of them (and probably more, as well as illegal votes registered for Biden, I think there were also some votes for Trump that were deleted, or disappeared) at last estimate, cuz despite everything the Lame Stream Media threw at him, 75 million people still voted for Trump. So that many people at least know they have been lied to.

B Clarke
June 19, 2021 1:55 am

Interesting comments on this thread,EG two people who fundamentally agree argue (ever so slightly) on how to go about things) right ,wrong ,minority, majority, sides, fairness, what is clear and can not be over stated is bias from what we have taken for granted indeed ingrained in us (some of us) that the media should report the news without bias and agendas .

( the science is settled)

This allows political agendas to flow through the masses without question ,because the media asks the questions for you and supplies the answers ,cleverly constructs and anticipates what you might be thinking and leads you to a predetermined answer. No wonder the masses follow blindly. Ensnared doubters can breath a sigh of relief.

So what is the answer ,balance ,how do you get a balance when the game is loaded against you,

You can’t in the climate debate ,the game is so loaded against the opponent ,as we have seen many times, ridicule, suppression, lying, altering the facts,censorship.

Its a war ,a war over to inform ,a equal platform .this web site can not go to war its not allowed to fly the flag high enough for the masses to see let alone read, this web site holds the ammunition to fight the propaganda war( and its not alone) .

What we need is a leader, be it a organisation or a person preferably both ,to take on and stand equal on a world platform.

Those of you who are informing which amounts to banging your head against a brick wall ,will find if a removed source confirms too the wall ,you might just have something ,a door might just appear in the wall.

Red94ViperRT10
Reply to  B Clarke
June 19, 2021 1:23 pm

I have become convinced that the media was always corrupt and highly biased, it’s just that prior to the internet, where anyone/everyone can publish their version of what happened, finding any disagreement was virtually impossible, the entire MSM marched (and still does today) in lockstep, making sure to put out the same stories with the same spin, without any dissent. It wasn’t ’til people could access other reporting besides the MSM that it became so evident.

B Clarke
Reply to  Red94ViperRT10
June 19, 2021 2:34 pm

Before and during the Internet we had right wing press left wing press both biased in there opinion , biased yes but there was a choice for the reader, the reader could choose to read thier own bias and if so wanted read the opposition point of view.

There is no opposing view via MSM =climate opposing views on the Internet are suppressed, why would you look,I refer you to my original post for the answ er popular sites like YouTube = Tony heller suspended ,suppressed, UK column gave up after being suspended time and time again, even small YT sites like wales grand solar minimum deleted 3 times he is on his 4th channel , I stand by original post .

Red94ViperRT10
Reply to  B Clarke
June 20, 2021 12:17 pm

Now, though, the censorship is obvious. I hope. I think we are making progress.

leitmotif
June 19, 2021 3:23 am

I know what you mean. Try posting on here when there is an article spouting about the evidence free hypothesis of the effects of back radiation from the atmosphere on the surface temperature.

Anyone who disagrees gets a big red negative downtick.

Lukewarmists are the new warmists.

MarkW
Reply to  leitmotif
June 19, 2021 9:02 am

Sky dragons are a lot like warmists.
Any evidence that goes against their dogma is just dismissed. There only response is not to present their own evidence, but to throw insults against those who disagree.

leitmotif
Reply to  MarkW
June 19, 2021 12:22 pm

Any evidence that goes against their dogma is just dismissed. “

What evidence is that, my little stalker?

the evidence free hypothesis of the effects of back radiation from the atmosphere on the surface temperature.”

So no comment from my little stalker on this statement.

“but to throw insults against those who disagree.”

The only person throwing insults is you, my little stalker.

MarkW
Reply to  leitmotif
June 19, 2021 8:04 pm

Another trait of cultists, is their need to redefine commonly used words.
Funny how answering a post makes one a stalker.

The evidence has been presented over and over again. The thousands of experiments that demonstrate the existence of back radiation is a good place to start.

Steve Keppel-Jones
Reply to  MarkW
June 30, 2021 7:31 am

“Back radiation” (from colder objects to warmer ones) exists, but does not transfer energy. It is not heat, and represents no power. Therefore it is not measured in W/m^2. Instead, it is thought of as an equilibrium photon “gas”, with characteristics of pressure, temperature, and volume. Pyrgeometers won’t show it, because they are not designed to measure it.

What do you think the RGHE would look like if NOAA posted SURFRAD plots of the actual measurements from their pyrgeometers, instead of biasing them by adding fake W/m^2 from the equilibrium photon gas? And therefore the “downwelling LWIR” on clear nights was shown as the actual value of -90 to -130 W/m^2? Does that sound like a (misnamed) “greenhouse” effect to you? Or more like a refrigerator?

leitmotif
Reply to  MarkW
June 19, 2021 1:24 pm

Funnily enough I agree with the the vast majority of the other stuff you post.

Isn’t that strange?

Dave Fair
Reply to  leitmotif
June 19, 2021 10:26 am

Bullshit. Back radiation from the atmosphere to the surface has been measured.

All of the various crap I’ve read on WUWT and other threads denying the GHE is patently false. The one about atmospheric pressure causing surface warming is probably the least defensible. Those denying the GHG effect need to conduct some actual experiments to prove their outlandish, anti-scientific pronouncements.

leitmotif
Reply to  Dave Fair
June 19, 2021 12:28 pm

You are an effin’ liar, Dave Fair.

the evidence free hypothesis of the effects of back radiation from the atmosphere on the surface temperature.”

is not the same as “Back radiation from the atmosphere to the surface has been measured.”

Where is your effin’ evidence on the effects of back radiation from the atmosphere on the surface temperature. Where is your experimental data?

Either put up or effin’ shut up, Dave Fair. You don’t have an effin’ clue.

leitmotif
Reply to  Dave Fair
June 19, 2021 12:34 pm

I nearly missed this.

Those denying the GHG effect need to conduct some actual experiments to prove their outlandish, anti-scientific pronouncements.”

Experiments to prove a negative? Hahahahahahahahaha!!!

Like prove prove God does not exist?

I don’t think Richard Feynman would have liked that one.

Dave Unfair.

Red94ViperRT10
Reply to  Dave Fair
June 19, 2021 1:30 pm

I can accept the “greenhouse affect” as true, I’m virtually certain that without an atmosphere the temperatures on this planet would be way different, but I have 2 questions… 1) how much of that is due to CO2? No one can answer that with certainty. And 2) Since it appears the greenhouse affect (even in a real greenhouse) relies primarily on stifling convection, what happens when e.g. a thunderstorm, or a hurricane (a whole collection of thunderstorms) springs up and punches a hole (a heat elevator if you will) right through that greenhouse, transporting heat to the tops of the thunderhead where it can radiate directly to space, without regard to the composition of the atmosphere it has punched through? It’s like a by-pass valve, by-passing my carefully planned control valves when I design a circulating chilled water or heating water system. So regardless of the GHE, there is also a PRV, to limit the maximum and provide a relief if there’s too much. Answers anyone?

Dave Fair
Reply to  Dave Fair
June 19, 2021 2:17 pm

OK, guys. As expected, my posting drew out the “no atmospheric back-radiation,” “LWIR radiation from the atmosphere can’t warm the oceans” and etc. kooks. I’m not going to try to argue with illogical, non-scientific arguments from people pounding their pet theories.

Goodbye, all. You win because the kooks will always beat one down with incessantly more vociferous faux scientific arguments. Willis gave you a whole Thread and you still came up with bumkins.

leitmotif
Reply to  Dave Fair
June 19, 2021 3:19 pm

In other words, Dave Fair, you have no evidence to back up your assertions on back radiation so you throw all of your toys out of the pram in one go and call us kooks.

Didn’t you know that science is about providing evidence not fanciful beliefs?

Willis is a self-made “scientist” with a B.A degree in Psychology and no credible background but he seems to have fooled the likes of you into believing his evidence free hypotheses on the magical effects of back radiation.

Goodbye, you won’t be missed, Dave Fair, and good riddance.

June 19, 2021 3:25 am

The cartoon may be misleading. Polls indicate that in the US about 50% of people are skeptical of AGW. Something like 80% of democrats believe it but 80% of republicans do not. This is why the radical green agenda is going nowhere in Congress. Amusingly a poll says that Greta’s Sweden is even more skeptical. We skeptics are not a small minority.

Bruce Cobb
June 19, 2021 3:52 am

It takes courage, or gumption if you will, to value truth above what is expedient, and at the expense of being outcast within the immediate clan (family, friends etc.). But valuing truth also means being willing and able to let the chips fall where they may, meaning that you can even be an outcast within the Outcasts. A good example of that is the issue of Trump, who I did vote for in both elections, and his Big Lie and traiterous actions about the election. Now instantly, herd behavior at this blog site, which I love because it tells the truth about climate dictates that I will receive numerous downvotes as well as snide comments from the self-appointed, ignorant Trump bullies. Such is life.

Observer
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
June 19, 2021 8:15 am

The problem is, it’s not clear that it is a “Big Lie” that the election was interfered with.

99% of the (mainstream) press immediately dismissed the claims as “baseless” long before they’d had a chance to examine the evidence – which doesn’t give a great deal of confidence in the objectivity of their reporting – and we know that many, many of their claims were false to smear Trump – Russian Collusion, “fine people on both sides”, use of tear gas to clear peaceful protestors, Russian bounties on US servicemen in Afghanistan.

Regardless of whether there actually was substantial cheating, I don’t know why some people find the notion so outlandish; the US Deep State has spent scores of billions of dollars over decades to meddle with political outcomes and subvert elections all over the world; why wouldn’t they do it on their home turf? God knows they hated Trump.

Red94ViperRT10
Reply to  Observer
June 19, 2021 1:34 pm

Right! If the Leftists and anti-Trumpists are so certain there was absolutely no fraud, you would think they would welcome an audit of the election, to prove there was no fraud!!! You’re welcome to your opinion, but not your own facts, and one particular side seems to be hiding the facts.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Red94ViperRT10
June 19, 2021 3:47 pm

Yeah, the Democrat efforts to prevent audits of the various States votes ought to tell people something.

The Democrats wouldn’t do that if they did not have something to hide. If they didn’t have anything to hide, they would welcome vote audits to establish their legitimate win and shut their opposition up. But they don’t do that.

Izaak Walton
Reply to  Tom Abbott
June 19, 2021 5:29 pm

Tom,
The so-called audit in Arizona is nothing but a joke. If you want to conduct a rigorous independent audit of an election you do not hand over the ballots to a company with no expertise or experience and who founder has publically stated beforehand that hundreds of thousands of votes for Trump will be found. The cyberninjas then instructed their auditors to look for bamboo fibres and secret watermarks despite there being no evidence that such things were used. And now all of the data has been moved to an unmonitored site in Montana where nobody is allowed access so that there is no way of knowing whether the results are being counted accurately and fairly.

So yes not only are democrats objecting to this but so are a lot of Republicans.

Mark D
Reply to  Izaak Walton
June 19, 2021 9:58 pm

The so-called audit in Arizona is nothing but a joke.
You mean a joke like an “election” where magical results occur in the middle of the night?

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Izaak Walton
June 20, 2021 5:16 am

I hear Pennsylvania will be the next State to do an audit of the Nov. 2020, vote.

I suggest you wait until the results are in from all the States doing vote audits, before criticizing the effort, if you are operating in good faith.

Red94ViperRT10
Reply to  Izaak Walton
June 20, 2021 12:23 pm

I agree that the Arizona audit is not a true complete “forensic” audit, the original proposal only got about 75% there, and Democrat (and other usual suspects) interference has limited even further. But yet, even so, interesting things are coming to light. Well, maybe not to those who stole the election, to them they’re probably terrifying things coming to light.

MarkW
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
June 19, 2021 9:03 am

Once again, dismiss all evidence that doesn’t support what you wish to believe.

Red94ViperRT10
Reply to  MarkW
June 19, 2021 1:34 pm

Read what he wrote. He simply presented alternate evidence.

Sara
June 19, 2021 4:26 am

I try to avoid thundering herds. They can be detected from a safe distance, allowing me and others of my ilk to find a safe spot off to the side, so as to get out of their way.

I used to like parades, but now I try to avoid them, especially if they are full of people protesting “somethingsomethingsomething”, which they describe in a rather incoherent manner.

Maybe their frustrations stem from knowing deep down inside that they really can NOT control anything the planet does.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Sara
June 19, 2021 5:56 am

The problem with thundering herds is that they sometimes stampede right over the edge of a cliff. It is a just end for unthinking animals.

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
June 19, 2021 8:43 am

Unfortunately, in the case of the “climate” bullshit those with the sense to see through it find themselves between the herd and the cliff…

Sara
Reply to  AGW is Not Science
June 19, 2021 8:13 pm

But you’d think the noise the herd makes should be a warning to find a safe spot, right?

Hasbeen
June 19, 2021 5:35 am

I like high classic performance sports cars. I have one 20 years old, & a couple over 40 years old. I am a member of an international club relating to this hobby. One member who has a number of these, & some late model similar cars was on the web site praising battery electric cars. I asked him if he believed in the global warming story.

I was quite amazed to find quite a number of these classic car enthusiasts are strong believers, who want everyone to stop using fossil fuels. I found this a strange mixture, fossil fuel car enthusiast & global warming evangelist.

I have always assumed that those who had done well enough to indulge in this hobby would be rational clear thinking people, capable of evaluating most things. Now I can only assume they were lucky, either in business, or in their choice of fathers.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Hasbeen
June 19, 2021 3:52 pm

There’s a whole cottage industry starting up converting classic cars to electric drive.

Car guys are just as susceptible to climate change propaganda as anyone else.

Lawrence Sellin
June 19, 2021 6:08 am

[User permanently banned for impersonation]

MarkW
Reply to  Lawrence Sellin
June 19, 2021 9:06 am

Then there are the FBI agitators that helped to plan the event.

Lawrence Sellin
Reply to  MarkW
June 19, 2021 9:48 am

[User permanently banned for impersonation]

Lawrence Sellin
Reply to  Lawrence Sellin
June 19, 2021 10:15 am

[User permanently banned for impersonation]

Last edited 1 month ago by Lawrence Sellin
MarkW
Reply to  Lawrence Sellin
June 19, 2021 11:04 am

I read many people. If you would do the same, perhaps you wouldn’t be so ignorant.

MarkW
Reply to  Lawrence Sellin
June 19, 2021 11:03 am

This from the guy who has never presented any data to support his positions?

Lawrence Sellin
Reply to  MarkW
June 19, 2021 11:14 am

[User permanently banned for impersonation]

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Lawrence Sellin
June 19, 2021 11:16 am

Clearly you’re not keeping up with the most recent revelations about the FBI’s role. There is new evidence every day.

Lawrence Sellin
Reply to  Rory Forbes
June 19, 2021 12:31 pm

[User permanently banned for impersonation]

Red94ViperRT10
Reply to  MarkW
June 19, 2021 1:39 pm

I have seen reasonable analysis, that the “proof” of FBI agitators present may not be certain. I’m keeping an open mind, but after seeing the way so many other “conspiracy theories” have turned out, it wouldn’t surprise me if the “unindicted co-conspirators” were indeed FBI moles or agents or informants or whatever.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Red94ViperRT10
June 19, 2021 4:01 pm

It wouldn’t surprise me either, that FBI agents or informants were involved. I can’t say whether they were just observing or if they were instigating, but it’s a pretty good bet they were in the area.

The next question to ask is why did Nancy Pelosi turn down President Trump’s offer of the National Guard to come in before Jan. 6, as security?

And, if President Trump were actually trying to overthrow the goverment, then why would he offer the National Guard before the fact? That doesn’t make sense. Obviously, Trump was not trying to mount an insurrection.

That doesn’t keep the Democrats from lying about it, though.

MarkW
Reply to  Lawrence Sellin
June 19, 2021 9:07 am

Funny how the left wants the book to be thrown at those who protested at the capital, but won’t support even arresting the BLM and Antifa protestors who attack people and burn down buildings.

Lawrence Sellin
Reply to  MarkW
June 19, 2021 9:51 am

[User permanently banned for impersonation]

Lawrence Sellin
Reply to  Lawrence Sellin
June 19, 2021 9:56 am

[User permanently banned for impersonation]

MarkW
Reply to  Lawrence Sellin
June 19, 2021 11:05 am

A paper mache gallows. How threatening.

Lawrence Sellin
Reply to  MarkW
June 19, 2021 11:16 am

[User permanently banned for impersonation]

Lawrence Sellin
Reply to  Lawrence Sellin
June 19, 2021 11:32 am

[User permanently banned for impersonation]

Red94ViperRT10
Reply to  Lawrence Sellin
June 19, 2021 1:42 pm

It’s not much of a gallows without a trap-door! While it is an ominous image, it seems pretty clear to me that it would be of no use even if an actual execution is warranted.

Lawrence Sellin
Reply to  Red94ViperRT10
June 19, 2021 2:34 pm

[User permanently banned for impersonation]

Derg
Reply to  Lawrence Sellin
June 19, 2021 10:54 am

Msn 😉

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Derg
June 19, 2021 4:03 pm

Really!

MarkW
Reply to  Lawrence Sellin
June 19, 2021 11:04 am

Bringing a firearm is not the same as using a firearm.
Are you really this dense?

Lawrence Sellin
Reply to  MarkW
June 19, 2021 11:22 am

[User permanently banned for impersonation]

Red94ViperRT10
Reply to  Lawrence Sellin
June 19, 2021 1:43 pm

Neither the FBI nor the Justice Department has charged any Capitol trespasser with possession of a firearm. “Armed Insurrection” is just another MSM lie.

Lawrence Sellin
Reply to  Red94ViperRT10
June 19, 2021 2:16 pm

[User permanently banned for impersonation]

Red94ViperRT10
Reply to  Lawrence Sellin
June 20, 2021 12:24 pm

That makes one in a row.

Derg
Reply to  Lawrence Sellin
June 19, 2021 10:53 am

Lol…I wish people would arrest all those protesters pulling down statues, pilfering and burning buildings to the ground as opposed to people taking selfies while walking by priceless art without damaging 🙁

Lawrence Sellin
Reply to  Derg
June 19, 2021 11:43 am

[User permanently banned for impersonation]

Derg
Reply to  Lawrence Sellin
June 20, 2021 2:37 pm

Is this like Trump Russia colluuuusion 😉

Red94ViperRT10
Reply to  Derg
June 19, 2021 1:46 pm

This is the part that really bothers me. Those who did damage at the Capitol, or even trespassed on Jan 6, did wrong, they (most of them) know they did wrong, and should probably face some punishment. But why is this trespass getting way more FBI manhours than identifying and holding accountable the thugs that burned federal courthouses and private businesses, assaulted and even killed cops, and killed other citizens? Yeah, I’m talking about the BLM and Antifa rioters, after so many of them have been let off with little or no charges, there should be no charges coming out of the Jan 6 trespass either!

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Lawrence Sellin
June 19, 2021 11:20 am

If it weren’t for heard mentality

Did you mean herd mentality?

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Lawrence Sellin
June 19, 2021 3:54 pm

Most of the “Red Hat” brigade managed not to get arrested on Jan. 6. They were peacefully protesting like Trump told them to do.

The fools that broke into the Capitol Building will be punished for what they did.

Mark D
Reply to  Lawrence Sellin
June 19, 2021 9:52 pm

Lawrence I’m not buying what you are selling.

Nick Schroeder
June 19, 2021 6:29 am

Speaking of which:

The baaaa radiative moo greenhouse oink oink effect.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Nick Schroeder
June 19, 2021 10:32 am

The GHE has been measured, conforming to theory. Your rebuttals are risible.

Dan Ambrose
June 19, 2021 7:11 am

Smart People who challenge the popular narrative usually challenge their own narratives

JEHILL
June 19, 2021 7:12 am

Group Think is the other name for this. It is almost like the so-called “higher institutions of learning” have learned how to manufacture a product with little to no variances in its thinking processes.

This is why they also beach front property.

They either silo the information, poor critical thinking skills, or Cognitive Dissonance.

Bill Taylor
June 19, 2021 8:26 am

that is my life……daring to seek the truth and having 20/20 vision in a world that needs bifocals.

gringojay
Reply to  Bill Taylor
June 19, 2021 9:49 am

Now you tell me our contemporary American laird and savior needed bifocals all along.

C3D8D088-4782-433E-B6DB-2F695C5353AC.jpeg
June 19, 2021 9:30 am

I am very much into saving the planet, though I am not sure it has to do with “herd mentality” 😉

https://greenhousedefect.com/

Red94ViperRT10
Reply to  E. Schaffer
June 19, 2021 1:51 pm

Well, you’re not alone there. Research has shown that conservatives are way more likely to take what action they can take on a personal level (recycling, energy conservation, don’t litter, etc., etc.) toward being kind to our planet, than the liberals who want government to seize everyone’s income and use it to Green-New-Deal.

June 19, 2021 10:05 am

From an interview of former CDC director, Dr. Robert Redfield on COVID-19: “I don’t think it’s plausible that this virus went from a bat, to an animal–we still don’t know what animal–and then went into humans. And immediately had learned how to be human-to-human transmissible to the point of now causing one of the greatest pandemics we’ve had in the history of the world”
Question: “Do you think the probability here is that this leaked from a lab?”
“Well, my professional opinion as a virologist is that’s the hypothesis that I support. You know, other individuals–Tony Fauci for example–would say that he prefers to support that it evolved from nature. I think those are the two hypotheses. I should work hard to prove my hypothesis wrong, and he should work hard to prove his hypothesis wrong”

It’s refreshing to hear from a scientist that actually knows how to do science. Your mission is to prove your hypotheses and theories wrong as it’s impossible to prove them correct.

Robert of Texas
June 19, 2021 10:43 am

I look at the state of science today and wonder…how did we ever move beyond living in caves and eating raw food?

So it must have been the Engineers that moved us forward, not the Scientists.

leitmotif
Reply to  Robert of Texas
June 19, 2021 3:24 pm

It was supermarkets.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Robert of Texas
June 19, 2021 4:09 pm

The difference is today there is an ideological Propaganda Machine working 24 hours per day to brainwash the people of the world into ideological “Correct Thinking”.

Too many people are easily misled.

Crispin Pemberton-Pigott
June 19, 2021 3:23 pm

Without it, not of you would be reading this article.”

Edit:

“Without it, not one of you would be reading this article.

TonyG
June 19, 2021 4:31 pm

Something came to mind while reading this:

Has anyone noticed that when it comes to other topics, such as wearing masks, covid vaccine, etc., that the AGW believers around here are almost all in agreement on all of it, while the skeptics are all over the place on those issues?

I think the cartoon captures that exceptionally well.

mikebartnz
June 19, 2021 10:08 pm

Quote “Without it, not of you would be”
None instead of not.
I am not really sure if a spell checker is a help or a hindrance.

%d bloggers like this: