Steve Milloy,
Below is today’s Washington Post article (Web | PDF), where as it turns out, ‘climate misinformation’ is meant to mean Steve Milloy’s Twitter and Facebook accounts.
Please support JunkScience.com.
Who else drives the bad guys this crazy?
Here is the WaPo attack in relevant part:
Here is the offending tweet referenced by the WaPo:
Is any of that false? Let’s see.
Colorado has a long history of natural drought. Here’s a reconstruction of the past 1,200 years. Note Line F.
La Nina can heighten the chance of drought.
Drought-causing La Nina can be triggered by solar activity… as per this 2020 Washington Post report.
Was the fire ‘manmade’?
There was an early report of a downed Xcel Energy power line. But that has been doubted as the downed lines were actually telecom lines.
But there have been no reports of lightning, so manmade is looking like the only explanation.
So my tweet hit on all cylinders and is hardly “false” or “misinformation.”
Backing up my hypothesis is the report below volunteered by a local. I confirmed the basic facts for Boulder: Rainfall in 2021 was significantly higher than average (20.68 vs. 18.1) — despite the drought of the past few months.
So why would the Washington Post launch such a nasty and baseless attack?
Early this week, I tweeted about the Washington Post’s Capital Weather Gang total forecasting fail concerning this week’s East Coast snow storm.
Ouch. I guess that one hurt someone’s feelings at the Washington Post. They say ‘payback is a bitch’ but here payback is just silly.
Finally I would note that the Washington Post went to both Twitter and Facebook to seek redress about my “bad” behavior.
Both seem to have declined to take action as of now. Good for them.
But I would note that Facebook has been forced to admit that its climate “fact-checking” is just its “opinion.” Here’s an excerpt from Facebook’s answer to John Stossel’s defamation complaint:
The same would apply to Twitter as well.
The WashPo is around a year late on the bright idea of connecting Jan6th ‘disinformation’ to global warming ‘disinformation,’ the New York Times beat them to the punch on that last January. But it’s pure, pure, pure psychological projection of which side is dishing out all the disinformation, as I detailed last year about the NYT at my GelbspanFiles blog.
“The Capitol Riot and Climate Disinformation” — John Schwartz, New York Times“
Cliff Mass showed that the moisture content in the area was average despite recent drought conditions.
Both he and Jim Steele showed how every aspect of that day was within normal ranges.
The only real difference is large populations in the way of a normal event (that never the less would not have occurred except for human ignition) but this is clearly a perfect example of the Expanding Bullseye effect described by Lomborg and many others.
Yeah, but they’re not the proper “independent scientists”, nudge nudge wink wink.
Ray Bradbury
There is an irony in all this. For my part anyone who gets attacked by the Warmumists has obviously said something that true, sensible or otherwise worth reading, even if I may disagree. Then it is up to me to challenge if I can be bothered.
I suspect many people think likewise.
Facebook, Twitter etc. should appreciate that the referee should NOT kick the football or land a blow in a boxing match. The rules should be written oblivious of opinions.
Why would anyone want to know what the opinions of these platforms are?
”If people can show I’m wrong they should shame me off twitter.”
There’s the problem for alarmists, they can’t prove you wrong, which means they can’t shame you off twitter, so they try and censor you instead. But in the mean time they continue to spew out false propaganda…. Now, where have I seen this happen before….Communist nations perhaps??
The remedy for false speech is more speech, hence the first amendment which properly defends the liberty for all speech.
But we are continuously told that the first amendment applies only to government rules and regulations by the people who are not associated with the government.
Which then means that commercial entities get to trump the correct philosophy of human liberty and interaction.
Which then leads to capitalist oligarchy, which the left repeatedly claims to vigorously oppose.
As you can see by my short analysis, the people who are demanding fact checking and censorship (the left) are highly confused and a danger to liberty everywhere.
There is no way around that. They have voluntarily sealed their fate to remain sheep among wolves.
The Obama EPA “Endangerment Finding” must be over-turned … https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYhfrgRAbH4
Just for the record, Cliff Mass has also posted on the CO fire.
Choose your expert: WaPo or Cliff?
On an unrelated subject, I will say when a young person finds she or he has been lied to the source of the misinformation can never regain its former stature. There are going to be a lot of
Roy Spencer’s blog was demonetized by google:
“Unreliable and harmful claims”: This website has been demonetized by Google
As was Cap Allon at Electroverse. All spearheaded by a cabal called “Centre for Countering Digital H*te” which is funded by secret philanthropic organizations. When I asked how we could find out who was funding this organization, my question was kicked off Facebook for allegedly promulgating h*tred ! (My family was in Germany in the 1930s, and there are eerie similarities to the present.)
If anyone should be censored, it’s the Washington Post for massively spreading more disinformation & misinformation than almost every other downstream media. And remember, censorship always exposes the cover-up. And the cover-up always exposes the lies.
Many tweeter accounts are stupid and boring. OK. But you can usually find people who say silly stuff and still get it right on some topics. For almost all French speaking tweeter account discussing politics, there are some truthful statements, some relevant takes on important subject (well except for pure pro Macron pro En Marche tweeters, and then I can still agree with them on a few things).
In US politics, not so much. Often accounts are going to be “progressive” and “liberal” propaganda with zero good – or even non-crazy – take on anything. Literally. I’ve seen many accounts liking/reply/supporting Auschwitz Museum tweeter account take on the trivialization of you know what. I have checked a bunch of these accounts who apparently hate trivialization and each of them had, on their first few most recent tweets, one that did just that. (It’s rare that I can browse for an hour without one trivialization; a few days ago, I saw 7 trivializations in a few hours of browsing tweeter.)
So it’s just theater. I feel that US tweeter is a massive scam like the Ashley Madison cheating website.
It isn’t just a few silly tweets; it’s an observation, after hours of browsing (wasting time) on Tweeter, that most of the first replies to a tweet on US politics are from accounts that have almost no personality (and often extremely silly bios – low effort troll accounts?) and that promote these in particular:
David Rothkopf (@djrothkopf) / Twitter
Don Winslow (@donwinslow) / Twitter
Stonekettle (@Stonekettle) / Twitter
NoelCaslerComedy (@caslernoel) / Twitter
George Hahn (@georgehahn) / Twitter
Jon Cooper (@joncoopertweets) / Twitter
Rex Chapman (@RexChapman) / Twitter
Jim Stewartson, Antifascist, #RIPQ (@jimstewartson) / Twitter
Jeff Tiedrich (@itsJeffTiedrich) / Twitter
Angry Staffer (@Angry_Staffer) / Twitter
Hugo Lowell (@hugolowell) / Twitter
Barbara Malmet (@B52Malmet) / Twitter
Brian Tyler Cohen (@briantylercohen) / Twitter
Chip Franklin InsideTheBeltway.com (@chipfranklin) / Twitter
BrooklynDad_Defiant! (@mmpadellan) / Twitter
Southern Sister Resister – Wordsmith #IAmTheStorm (@ResisterSis20) / Twitter
Tristan Snell (@TristanSnell) / Twitter
Tea Pain (@TeaPainUSA) / Twitter
Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) / Twitter
Caroline Orr Bueno, Ph.D (@RVAwonk) / Twitter
Charlie Sykes (@SykesCharlie) / Twitter
Joyce Alene (@JoyceWhiteVance) / Twitter
Glenn Kirschner (@glennkirschner2) / Twitter
John Pavlovitz (@johnpavlovitz) / Twitter
Duty To Warn (@duty2warn) / Twitter
Eric Boehlert (@EricBoehlert) / Twitter
Jill Wine-Banks (@JillWineBanks) / Twitter
Claire McCaskill (@clairecmc) / Twitter
Aaron Parnas (@AaronParnas) / Twitter
Justin Baragona (@justinbaragona) / Twitter
Molly Jong-Fast (@MollyJongFast) / Twitter
Daniel Uhlfelder (@DWUhlfelderLaw) / Twitter
Grant Stern is fully vaccinated (@grantstern) / Twitter
Shannon Watts (@shannonrwatts) / Twitter
ReallyAmerican.com (@ReallyAmerican1) / Twitter
Andrea Junker (@Strandjunker) / Twitter
Fred Wellman (@FPWellman) / Twitter
CALL TO ACTIVISM (@CalltoActivism) / Twitter
Aunt Crabby Calls Bullshit (@DearAuntCrabby) / Twitter
Kyla In The Burgh (@KylaInTheBurgh) / Twitter
Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) / Twitter
Robert Reich (@RBReich) / Twitter
Cole (@cole_hartigan) / Twitter
Ricky Davila (@TheRickyDavila) / Twitter
Colin Martin (@NotGbo) / Twitter
Frank Figliuzzi (@FrankFigliuzzi1) / Twitter
The USA Singers (@TheUSASingers) / Twitter
Steven Beschloss (@StevenBeschloss) / Twitter
Asha Rangappa (@AshaRangappa_) / Twitter
Emily Winston (@Emywinst) / Twitter
TheSadTruth (@ReportsDaNews) / Twitter
TG (@TG22110) / Twitter
Mrs. Betty Bowers (@BettyBowers) / Twitter
These accounts are incredibly stupid, they don’t break news, they have no reason to appear sooooo often. Most are nobodies, a few are persons who are famous for saying stupid stuff elsewhere. Some are rogue actors like the disgusting Daniel Uhlfelder lawyer that was not disbarred (because only doing legitimate work can result in disbarment, probably). At least that one is inept but famous in the real world, for the worst reason (like a predator being famous).
It used to be that B52Malmet was the only account that was that inept and that often seen for no apparent reason. Now TheSadTruth appears very often. Again for no intelligent or stupid reason.
So I claim the whole stuff is 100% artificial and a con.
Note to editor: relevant illustrations in this post are replaced by squares so the message is lost.
His site appears to be down for “maintenance” … ? WUWT?
There are always two sides to a story. If one is only hearing one side, then they are working with a half-truth.
If liberals try to suppress things they don’t agree with, then it is obvious they are not interested in the whole truth.
Why would that be? For the same reason that Biden hasn’t insisted on a bi-partisan committee to investigate the charges of voting fraud to remove the cloud over the legitimacy of his election. They are afraid of what might crawl out from under the rocks they start turning over.