Originally tweeted by Roger Pielke Jr. (@RogerPielkeJr) on December 10, 2021.
This is funny
I am looking at the silly paper on an AI tool for spotting “denialists”
The training material codes Phil Jones Climategate email stating that he will keep certain papers out of the IPCC as climate denial category 5.2🤣
I'm starting to think this must be a Sokal!!
Another fun one
An accurate representation of my peer-reviewed research with @JessicaWeinkle @maue is climate denial category 1.7
More fun ‘n games with the Skeptical Science guys
My mere existence as described in the statement below from their training dataset is labeled as climate denial category 1.7 😎
My polite responses to Joe Romm earn a climate denial category 5.2 rating 😎
How did my widely-cited peer-reviewed work & I specifically became coded as "climate denial" in this algorithm?
Simple
Algorithm training was done by people pursuing a decade+ vendetta against me
They are automating character assassination & calling it "science"
Awesome!
More seriously
Let's say a Facebook or Twitter decides to run with the new AI climate denial detector
That means that anyone mentioning this peer-reviewed, widely-cited & accurate paper would be labeled a "denialist"
https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/clim/25/13/jcli-d-11-00719.1.xml
That's … crazy, right?
It also means that anyone mentioning me and the fact I am a professor at the University of Colorado and details of my accomplishments would be labeled by the algorithm as a "climate denialist"
I know the Skeptical Science guys intensely hate me, but this is . . . something
In the test of the climate denial algorithm it flagged a mention of this peer-reviewed paper (2005, 412 citations) as "climate denial"
Pielke Jr, R. A., Landsea, C., Mayfield, M., Layer, J., & Pasch, R. (2005). Hurricanes and global warming. BAMS, 86(11), 1571-1576.
On one level the climate denial algorithm is a huge success
These guys have spent a decade+ trying to demonize (falsely) me & my research as a "denier"
They have successfully automated that effort & in the process revealed to everyone exactly what they are up to 👀
More for this thread . . .
Other unambiguously true statements flagged as "climate denial" by the nice algorithm developed by the good folks doing this "study"
If we didn't know it already, I've got one of these🎯 on my back 🤓
Don't worry good science wins in the end😎
Originally tweeted by Roger Pielke Jr. (@RogerPielkeJr) on December 10, 2021.
Haters gotta hate.
Lazy haters use a bot.
You’re channelling your inner Taylor Swift
You’d betta shake it off, shake it off
Algorithms, in this case more of an Al Goreism, are just the automated opinions of the programmers.
What a pity that the courts almost always deny “scientific” opinions can be libel, which this clearly is.
They cast Pielke as a “denier” and this causes him harm. Quantifying that harm would be a little difficult and the magnitude would probably not be very great, not large enough to catch the attention of an attorney that would work on contingency. So, taking any legal action would involve expense without a sufficient return even if the courts could be trusted.
At the University of Colorado, the administration hates him and so do many of his environmental “scientist” peers. Despite their squeals of inclusion, supporting diversity and promoting a welcoming community, the administration in reality wants everyone to fall into a single line. They want Pielke gone and they would nitpick him to death to get rid of him.
Pielke is like a pebble in a shoe, a thorn in their side. He is mostly objective and he slows down the alarmists, which is good. He’s worthy of the support of realists, though what the best way to do so is a good question.
The odd thing is that Pielke thinks CO2 is a problem.
Yes, it seems that that is implicit in his positions, though I wonder. I have not read any of his books to get a better understanding of his stance on this point, but as far as his policy positions are concerned, he’s a realist.
For example, he knows that globally, we cannot/will not commission a nuclear power plant every day.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/rogerpielke/2019/09/30/net-zero-carbon-dioxide-emissions-by-2050-requires-a-new-nuclear-power-plant-every-day/?sh=225f4c7535f7
Partial agreement isn’t helpful because it implies there is room for discussion. It’s the narrative or nothing.
Correct you have to go full retard for the CAGW crowd or you are against them.
Pretty sure that you could come up with an algorithm to calculate damages …
That’s true, though it’s often been said that the squabbles within academia are so vicious because stakes are so low.
University positions are useful, but the big money is in government (laws and fund allocation that is).
Legally, in most jurisdictions, an opinion, “scientific” or otherwise, is by definition not defamatory. To defame someone you must make a false assertion of fact. Due to the highly questionable Sullivan decision, to defame a public figure like Professor Pielke you must not only knowingly make a false assertion of fact, but malice, not mere mistake, must be the motivating factor.
Stuff like this really puts the “artificial” in AI, doesn’t it? It is a shame we currently spend so much money, resources, and time trying to undo 400 years of human progress. Who actually benefits?
https://twitter.com/logan_ratick/status/1417259541243351045
It’d be interesting to see a similar breakdown for “CAGW”.
PS I didn’t see any mention of poor siting of weather stations, “adjusting” past records, satellites, failed projections, Yamal 06, etc.
(Maybe they didn’t want to call attention to them?)
OOP!
This was meant as a reply to David Wojick below.
Those insecure people with huge egos.
…and those elected people in the government…
You are being redundant.
Just switch it off
Windmills may help
1984
Cook is a weapons grade twat.
Do not insult twats,
much pleasure is derived from the vertical smile.
It’s horizontal to some perspective.
+1000
Look up the Star Trek and other SciFi parody webcomic Sev Trek. That’s what John Cook was doing before he decided to jump on the AGW bandwagon. I used to read his comic but hadn’t been to the page in quite a while. When I did, he had the comic archives and a new page with a link to his new Skeptical Science website.
No just a normal twat.
AI (ay-eye) reads the same Al (Ay-el) as in Bundy. So, from now on, whenever I see the abreviation AI I’ll think of Al Bundy. Sorry Mr Bundy.
Regards,
Bob
“Ay-el”! Good one, Bob. That’s just the way Al’s wife pronounced his name in times of family stress.
Great show. It touched on a lot of sensitive subjects during its run. By today’s standards, it’s pretty tame. But it’s funny. I love the theme song.
This is amazing to watch. Climate Change alarmism is clearly a religion/religious quest reminiscent of the religious crusades hundreds of years ago. Can you imagine the eternal humiliation these religious zealots have brought upon their family names and reputations. An entire group of people who fell under the spell of a cult-like religious movement circa 2020 AD.
an inquisition
Climate Change Alarmism is a cult.
One of these days the cult members are going to realize they have been fooled, and their worldview does not represent reality. I wonder how they will react then?
The theory is that crowds go mad en mass and only recover their senses one by one, so it will be just a trickle.
The interesting thing is that to the extent this machine works it then becomes a potentially useful search engine for us skeptics. It would be great to be able to find the latest skeptical writing on a specific issue.
Here is Cook et al’s crude issue tree, which does touch on most of of the issues:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-01714-4/figures/1
They may be helping skepticism! They call it misinformation but I call it sound skeptical argument. (And I am a logician.)
Its hugely funny. A handy reference for searching for “climate truth.”
I like that “denier” was not used anywhere in the text. There are a couple among the citations, and “contrarian” has a positive connotation in certain circumstances, for instance contrarians in the stock market are known to make money by seeing trends develop before the general population.
Yes, his issue tree reveals where the alarmists are weak, what they miss.
For several years here I advocated “contrarian” as the most neutral term for our side. I’m pleased that I’ve had some impact, apparently.
(This was mistakenly posted as a reply to a different comment above.)
It’d be interesting to see a similar breakdown for “CAGW”.
PS I didn’t see any mention of poor siting of weather stations, “adjusting” past records, satellites, failed projections, Yamal 06, etc.
(Maybe they didn’t want to call attention to them?)
Thank you for that ‘issue tree’. 1,2 and 3 are straightforward admissions of our accusations against them, but 4 and 5? Since when do we think “science is conspiracy”? More disturbing is their take on ‘policy’. Those are THEIR talking points, reflected upon what they imagine our idiot concerns are. I for one have never said “green jobs won’t work”, when we all know those will actually just be make-work for entitled whelps in a world with no real, proper, contributive manufacturing and production careers available outside Chinese factories and the Amazonian soy farms.
But yes, how exactly shall we exploit this tool that gives us so much insight into the mind of our Enemy?
Good insight!
When fighting the communists, it’s good to know their tactics and the moves they are likely to make. It’s kind of like Lenin, or whoever, that said they would hang the capitalists with their own rope.
Also their findings support Benny Peiser’s recent observation that the debate is entering a new phase. Skeptical arguments against the nonsensical green “solutions” like net zero are growing well. Works for me!
That seems to be where Pielke makes valid points.
Why is it remarkable, that after lying about “climate change” for 30 years, they would automate the lying? Big Tech and Big Media have been nothing but all lies all the time for years. And not just “climate change”, look at Covid: two years of lies, two years of doing the wrong thing, and we are at the same rate of hospitalization as last year. They must lie because they are all fools and incompetents with too much power.
No, not two years, two weeks.
Now they’re giving kids pizza in exchange for getting the vaccine, then telling the kids not to tell their parents. Uh, that’s what child abusers do. “Don’t tell your parents.” Getting a covid vaccine should be up to the individuals or their parents or guardians.
“Piece of candy, go for a ride?”
wow, automatic cancelation!
Until these leftarded liars are severely physically and financially punished they will continue to spew lies, just as Faux Joe Xiden did on the Tonight Show.
In the meantime, Michael Mann deserves to receive the Jussie Smollet award for truth in science.
I really want Mikey Mann to get a Nobel. It would make this scientific dwarf so happy and it would reinforce the parody that Nobel prizes have become. Please can Greta get one too. For science, not peace
Does that come with bleach and a decorative rope?
That is only include in the Raciaal Equitie category.
Justus Fer Juicie.
“Don’t worry good science wins in the end:-)”
Excessive optimism. The more heavily armed, well trained, and well supplied when in the end.
Mother Nature will win in the end.
win not when
No, bad economic results “win” in the end. The average citizen knows nothing of science and couldn’t care less, especially CliSciFi.
G’Day Dave,
“The average citizen knows nothing of science…”
What he does know about is his wallet/bank account – and if he has neither of those, cold and hunger.
And then the ballot box. If enough people vote compared to the number of eligible voters it gets somewhat harder to cheat. (Thinking in terms of ‘ballots’ counted at 3AM, without proper supervision.)
“For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled !”
Richard Feynman, according to The Meaning of it All, 1999 it was also his closing comment on the Challenger disaster report.
You may well be entirely correct but if it runs counter to the narrative… you aren’t.
That’s where “fact checked” opinions come in…
All I can figure out of this situation is that Cook went to see Lewandowski to treat his psychoses, but then they both succumbed to the imaginary nemesis of “climate denial”, so now this condition dictates their every thought & behavior.
Cook is like the Robin Williams character in “The Fisher King” where he imagines a fire-breathing knight on horseback bearing down on him with murderous intent.
The knight for Cook is a “climate denier”.
Sad.
He was acstudent of Lewandowsky where he did a PhD in cognballs science. I suspect that he would have gotten more sane psych advice from Lewandowski – and tips to improve his game.
I’ll bet BitCoin that this AI truthotron will say the Answer to the Ultimate Question is NOT 42 !
Anyone who says it is 42 is an Ultimate Question DENIER!.
No..Wrong.. The answer is always 42. It is the answer to the meaning of life, the universe and everything!
Now I am 100% convinced that it is a religion and that it is dangerous.
From the article: “They are automating character assassination & calling it “science”
A good description of the process.
Instead of character assasination, why don’t the alarmists offer a little proof of their climate change claims? Answer: The Alarmists don’t have any evidence to offer, so the only thing they have left is character assasination of those who point this out.
Facebook had to admit in a Congressional hearing that their “fact checkers” are not experts and are merely giving their “professional opinions” regarding the postings they are “fact checking”….WOW! They used that claim also as a defense against liability saying their fack checkers’ “opinions” are protected speech…..REALLY? Even when they are used as justification to CENSURE and REMOVE someone else’s opinion on their own Facebook page?
Calling Cook’s program “AI” is like calling calling a molehill a mountain.
It’s more like a Truthinator, killing truth whereever it can be found. Sara Connor?
Phil Jones should have been panned for using “as well” twice in the same sentence.
Cook’s algorithm is simply an extension of climate models, built to provide a pre-determined answer.
Because it’s all they know
Their “facts” only add up after run through computer they programed.
(Remember the “fudge factor” in the climategate emails?)
Ignorance is strength
Ask any climate alarmist
Oh Roger Now they will remove your doorhandles and install 6 inches of insulation on your office walls to shrink your work space further. Nil Illegitemum carburundum! but to be targeted by the Ministry of Truth means that something you are doing is right. Keep up the good work. You and others like you are a beacon in these dark times.
It is deeply sinister that the censor monster is moving out of the dark shadows. It feels like I am living in a hybrid of Middle Earth under Sauron and Ayn Rand’s horrible distopia
Looks like the latest AI has discovered the trough and what its snouts for.
This is very worrying. The climate clergy are both ruthless and skilled in propaganda and suppressing rational arguments as if they are heresy. I hope that Dr. Pielke has the fortitude to continue to seek the truth; to not cave in to coercion.
I hate to admit it but these b*stards have the ear of politicians and much of the gullible public.
Religion (e.g. morality, ethics, law) for people capable of self-moderation. Competing interests to mitigate the progress of others running amuck, or not (e.g. single/central/monopolies). All’s fair in lust and abortion, I suppose.
This smells of Podesta. Who else would fund John Cook and his misfits for five years?
I wouldn’t be surprised.
The use of “Artificial Intelligence” can only be justified by a lack of acccess to the real thing.
They must be rattled about something. If the views you hold are true then why feel the need to seek out & fact check opponents so strongly? What’s the worry? Do you have a little nagging doubt that your views may not in fact be true after all, or is it something more sinister? Is this ‘Denialism’ really dangerous & a threat to something?
they should have used topic analysis.
long ago i worked for a company that sent 1800 field reps into the field daily to make reports
rather than read 100os of meeting notes a day i just used topic analysis.
it works
What is wrong with the good old coin toss then it’s basically the same thing and same prediction skill level.
While these algorithms are indeed artificial, they are not intelligent. They are just fancy expert systems, but instead of each decision node needing to be explicitly designed and coded into the program, they train “neural network” based systems to build up a (hopefully) more robust decision matrix. It is, of course, highly dependent on the training materials used. If you feed it faulty (biased, wrong, etc.) information, it will produce faulty results. You can only trust them as much as the people that trained them.
What a tool. Having been educated in computer science and then spending my business career actually using computers to do something useful, I can say this clown should be ostracized for the rest of his life.