LinkedIn’s Climate “Script”

Guest “Level playing field, my @$$” by David Middleton

Over the past year or so, a number of scientists, skeptical of the alarmist climate change narrative, have been banned from LinkedIn or closed out their accounts due to the censorship of their well-documented articles on climate change. Among these people are Gregory Wrightstone, Andy May and Pat Frank. Yet, LinkedIn allows crap like this to flow freely:

For some reason, I can’t embed the second post like I did with the first post. It’s probably because it links to a Financial Times article. It again included a variation of the Antarctic ice core CO2 hockey stick.

This hockey stick has been dismantled in at least two WUWT posts:

If you read the comments to the two LinkedIn posts, you’ll find very thoughtful remarks from Rob Bradley, David Siegel, Renee Hannon, Doug Sheridan and many others. These comments were generally replied to with ad hominem fallacies and/or something called “The Script”…

The source of “The Script”, unsurprisingly, is the logical fallacy factory: Skeptical Science.

I generally avoid these sorts of discussions on LinkedIn, because I’m there to network with other professionals, mostly in the energy industries, not to waste time arguing with scientifically illiterate trolls. These posts usually come into my feed because one, or more, of my connections post comments.

I thought about reporting the posts to LinkedIn… But decided I would post them here for the WUWT community to ridicule. Then I’ll post links to this thread with the comment, “Thanks for the material.”

5 32 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tom Halla
May 15, 2022 2:08 pm

Skeptical Science is what one would expect from John Cook, of “97%” infamy.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Tom Halla
May 15, 2022 3:34 pm

Cook was only riding the 97% coattails. He didn’t originate it.

Reply to  Tom Halla
May 16, 2022 6:05 am

May 15, 2022 2:13 pm

I love this analogy.

May 15, 2022 2:14 pm

I don’t want to be LinkedIn

Michael S. Kelly
Reply to  gbaikie
May 16, 2022 8:48 pm

I don’t use it much, BUT…

While going through a painful divorce, I became curious about the girl I had dated 30 years prior to my failing marriage. She works in the same field as I do, aerospace engineering, and I thought she might be on LinkedIn. Sure enough, she was. I sent her a link request, and just a few minutes later, received an acceptance. That was in 2013. We moved in together in 2014, got married in 2017, and are the happiest each of us have ever been.

And to think, I almost didn’t open an account…

Reply to  Michael S. Kelly
May 19, 2022 5:19 pm


If they make a sequel to When Harry met Sally, your story would work.

And, better late than never.

Gregory Wrightstone
May 15, 2022 2:17 pm

LinkedIn Bans Geologist for Climate Change Posts: ‘This Type of Content Is Not Allowed’

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Gregory Wrightstone
May 15, 2022 3:42 pm

You know you are over the target when the explosive desperation flak gets heavy!

Philip Mulholland
May 15, 2022 2:19 pm

I gave up on LinkedIn and closed my account when it became apparent that they were deliberately reducing the reach, thereby interfering in the growth of personal networks.

Steve Case
Reply to  Philip Mulholland
May 15, 2022 2:44 pm

If anyone thinks that the Republicans are going to score a big victory this coming November, they are going to be very surprised. Will the Democrats score a 2/3 majority in both houses? Maybe not, but it will be close. Has everyone seen 2000 Mules? It’s going to be double or triple that and they won’t be schleping around their cell phones this time.

Reply to  Steve Case
May 15, 2022 3:55 pm

“Has everyone seen 2000 Mules?” Wait for the indictments to start. And they will, there’s just too much evidence to ignore. People will think twice about engaging in voter fraud when staring at Federal incarceration.

Steve Case
Reply to  markl
May 15, 2022 4:23 pm

Oh really? The fix is in, the judges have been carefully selected or bought off. The left is engaging in an end run, and they think they can run for daylight and score big.

Well, come November and we will find out.

Old Man Winter
Reply to  Steve Case
May 15, 2022 5:33 pm

Given the reality check of open boarders, inflation, baby food shortages, etc.,
the Dem’s goose is cooked & they know it. The GOP would be smart to say
they’ll monitor all drop boxes to scare them into not trying it again. The crimes
they’ve committed will require a day of reckoning.

What if there is no election? Wuhan flu, Jan 6-type claim, war, libs rioting, etc?
You can’t lose if there’s no election. Desperate people may do desperate stuff!

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Old Man Winter
May 17, 2022 3:14 am

I think the Democrats have pushed it about as far as they can without suffering repercussions. They ae not the only ones who can turn out into the streets, if it becomes necessary.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Steve Case
May 17, 2022 3:12 am

“The fix is in, the judges have been carefully selected or bought off.”

Who did this selecting and buying off? You imply you have details about this activity. Can we have some of those details?

Reply to  Tom Abbott
May 17, 2022 6:28 am

He probably just means the same judges and prosecuters who have turned a blind eye to all the other malfeasance over the past several years, Tom.

Don Perry
Reply to  markl
May 15, 2022 6:02 pm

Federal indictments? Who engages the federal grand jury? The current AG? I’ve never been more worried about the Republic than I am right now. I don’t know whether I more wish I were younger to fight or wish the end would come so I don’t have to watch what is about to happen. Take a close look, count and tell me how many in positions of power and connection have actually been held accountable for what was done during Trump’s campaign and throughout his entire administration.

Reply to  Don Perry
May 15, 2022 8:10 pm

Take one of them with you, Don. Your children and grandchildren will thank you and cherish your memory.

What’s an extra few years tacked on to a full life when you are passing down freedom to your progeny?

Reply to  markl
May 16, 2022 8:28 am

“Wait for the indictments to start. And they will, there’s just too much evidence to ignore

I don’t think we live in the same worlds if that’s true where you are.

Don Perry
Reply to  Steve Case
May 15, 2022 5:53 pm

And, if that’s the case, then it is time to realize the true meaning and intent of the second amendment. I’m approaching 80 years old, but I’m still able to pull a trigger.

Reply to  Don Perry
May 15, 2022 8:27 pm

Ah. You get it. See my comment above to your first comment. If you’re any good, you can do 2 or 3 for 1.

Burgher King
Reply to  Steve Case
May 15, 2022 7:39 pm

If their goal is thousands of Democrats installed at every level of government, regardless of what current polling says about their prospects, the Dems are completely confident they can pull off an election steal in 2022 as big or bigger than the one they pulled off in 2020.

They will inject fraudulent votes at every stage of the election process. As in 2020, they will use a variety of techniques to do this — vote trafficking ala 2000 mules, vote harvesting, direct manipulation of Dominion voting machines, non-delivery of mail-in ballots from Republican precincts by USPS workers; and last but not least, contingency stashes of fraudulent ballots stored near the large vote tabulation centers for quick retrieval if the other fraud methods haven’t delivered enough ballots to turn the tide.

On election night, they will do what they did in 2020 and use their remote access to the vote tabulation systems to determine in real time how many fraudulent ballots need to be delivered after 11 PM to give their candidates a victory.

If anyone attempts to stop them as this is happening, the Republicans who observe and report vote fraud while it is in progress will themselves by arrested by corrupt authorities and will be charged with criminal interference in an election.

As of yet, I’ve seen no organized effort and no strategic plan on the part of the Republicans to counter what the Democrats will be doing in 2022 to perpetrate massive vote fraud. Until we see the Republicans start to move smartly forward in countering yet another big steal, the Red Wave of 2022 will be stillborn.

Last edited 1 year ago by Burgher King
Reply to  Burgher King
May 16, 2022 9:53 am

My worry exactly. I wrote a letter to the RNC chair telling them to stop asking me for donations until they show us a plan for countering fraud. I have had no reply.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Steve Case
May 17, 2022 3:08 am

“Has everyone seen 2000 Mules?”

I saw the first half of it, but the last half was corrupted. Anyone have a good link to an uncorrupted version?

I agree the Democrat mules won’t be taking their cell phones with them this next time they cheat, but I think they have already been exposed from the last time.

One thing I thought was telling in the part of the vidoe I saw was, the mules started wearing surgical gloves right after a ballot stuffer was convicted of stuffing ballots based on the stuffer’s fingerprints being found on numerous ballots. So the mules are quick, and they got themselves some gloves to hide their fingerprints. Probably on orders fro On High.

I assume the Republicans will be watching all drop boxes like a hawk. Here’s something they could do: retrieve the gloves the mules discard after they stuff the drop box. They usually take them off and throw them away right there, so retrieve them and you can get their fingerprints off the inside of the gloves.

Republicans ought to have at least one person watching and recording the drop boxes 24 hours per day until the election is over.

I think American citizens are so upset with the Democrats that they are going to turn out in record numbers against them. Enough to swamp any cheating. But the Republicans should not depend on this, they should take every measure possible to prevent the Democrats from their cheating.

May 15, 2022 2:41 pm

Models successfully predict past temperatures! Who would have thought they could do that!

Reply to  jtl
May 15, 2022 8:49 pm

And road building in Ireland predicts U.S. pregnancy rates, too.

Rod Evans
Reply to  SocietalNorm
May 15, 2022 11:19 pm

The best correlation I have seen showing causation is not the same as correlation is Shark attacks in Australia versus Ice cream sales. The sharks get more active when people have had an ice cream….apparently. 🙂

Old Cocky
Reply to  Rod Evans
May 16, 2022 2:00 am

That may be a valid correlation, but without a direct causative link. People go to the beach and eat ice cream in warm weather, then go for a swim or paddle. More people -> more shark attacks.
The shark attack numbers are low enough to have rather wide uncertainty bounds.

How about sunscreen sales and shark attacks? Perhaps sharks are rather fond of sunscreen.
Or Californian figures for water skiers wearing leather jackets vs. shark attacks?

Tom Abbott
Reply to  jtl
May 17, 2022 3:23 am

“Models successfully predict past temperatures! Who would have thought they could do that!”

You probably know this, but some may not. These past “temperatures” the models show are not valid temperatures. The computer models are hindcasting a bastardized, bogus temperature record that doesn’t exist in reality. Therefore, the computer models are wrong. They can’t get past temperatures correct, so we should not expect them to get future temperatures correct, either.

Ron Long
May 15, 2022 2:44 pm

What makes the CAGW crowd dysfunctional and proud of it? A scientist must be introspective and curious, since the CAGW crowd does not doubt their global warming ideas they are neither introspective nor curious. So, where does their fanaticism come from? This is Political Science used as a whip to control the masses. When will it end? Total control or revolution? Don’t mess with taxes or don’t mess with Texas?

John Bell
Reply to  Ron Long
May 15, 2022 3:06 pm

The little foot soldiers see themselves as not part of the masses to be controlled but as high level climate warriors! they imagine they will be proud to have personally torn down the racist fossil fuel empire, destroy the white patriarchy and go green! Oh yeah…they are nuts! I loathe the far left.

Reply to  Ron Long
May 15, 2022 5:43 pm

“So, where does their fanaticism come from?”

It’s a religion. They are priests practicing their craft. But unlike traditional religion, since the Reformation, everybody must comply.

May 15, 2022 2:45 pm

Ah, the Magic Of The Ideological Market Place. Linkedin is a private sector entity. They claim to censor only flat out lies, and you disagree. So, let the market work it’s magic. If the “skeptics” boycott it and go tell their tale on Truth Social, I’m sure that linkedin will shrivel up and die.

ITMT, any pissed off current subscribers can unjoin. Just add it to their ever growing lists of professional and technical organizations who are part of the Dr. Evil AGW conspiracy. Folks, the immutable rule of Raylan, redux:

Reply to  bigoilbob
May 15, 2022 3:09 pm

And there goes free speech along with the right to question science. That happens, and society goes backwards.Just like North Korea.

Reply to  aussiecol
May 15, 2022 4:37 pm

Who’s “right to question science” is being abrogated. You can yell anything you like from any street corner. This is a private enterprise unwilling to enable silly nonscience

Reply to  bigoilbob
May 15, 2022 5:09 pm

You really need to talk with Biden and his new Department of Disinformation.

Reply to  bigoilbob
May 15, 2022 5:11 pm

Publishers can be sued for what they print. Bulletin boards can’t.
LinkedIn/Twitter/Facebook, and the government, claim that they are bulletin boards, despite the fact that every time they censor something just because they disagree with it, they are acting like publishers.

Reply to  MarkW
May 15, 2022 5:31 pm

Publishers can be sued for what they print.”

Can they be sued for what they decide not to print.?

ANY publisher, and any bulletin board, for profit or non, curates their content. Nonsensical letters to the editor mostly don’t get published. That linkedin is doing such curation is Mr. Middleton’s whine here.

AGAIN, the lack of acceptance of denier claims isn’t from a Dr. Evil censorship conspiracy. Those claims have been aired frequently and openly. Often with dark and not so dark $ backing. Rather, it’s the inherent weaknesses of those claims that limits their acceptance.

If your ideas are valid, you will prevail in their marketplace. And visa versa…

Old Man Winter
Reply to  bigoilbob
May 15, 2022 6:21 pm

Despite all the down votes, you nailed it. When we complained of being
censored, the Libs said start your own company. There’s now Truth
Social & Rumble. When the libs whined about Musk taking over Twitter,
we chimed in that Libs should start their own company. Sauce for the
goose sauce for the gander!

If Musk gets Twitter, that will be a problem for YouTube & Fakebook.

Reply to  Old Man Winter
May 15, 2022 6:56 pm

Someone did start their own company. Parlor, until AWS shut them down.

Old Man Winter
Reply to  MarkW
May 15, 2022 10:15 pm

Dan Bongino was one of the pricipals in Parlor & learned a hard lesson-
make sure you aren’t vulnerable to attacks. He’s also a principal in
Rumble where they’re kicking butt! You may not get it right the first time
but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t keep trying.

As for LinkedIn, they want to be woke so David’s complaint of unfairness
is accurate. The solution is to set up a competitor that can’t be shut
down like Parlor. Make them pay for their wokeness as one thing
everyone wants is fairness.

Reply to  bigoilbob
May 15, 2022 6:56 pm

Poor little Bob, he once again has to go out of way to demonstrate his ignorance.
The fact that he has to resort to insults rather than actually addressing the arguments of those he disagrees with, is just more proof that even he knows he can’t defend the claims he makes.

Reply to  bigoilbob
May 15, 2022 10:25 pm

If your ideas are valid, you will prevail in their marketplace. 

Well bigoilbob, that would be true only if those ideas have access to the marketplace…

 Often with dark and not so dark $ backing.

Could you please identify this “not so dark” backing? I’ve tried my best to get some of the dark money but I just cannot find it. Its almost like it didn’t exist! So if you could point me to the “not so dark” money, I’d really appreciate that.

Andrew Wilkins
Reply to  bigoilbob
May 15, 2022 11:27 pm

Visa versa? Is that some sort of travel document for a Roman legionary?

Tom Abbott
Reply to  bigoilbob
May 17, 2022 3:27 am

“If your ideas are valid, you will prevail in their marketplace.”

This is true, and I believe the Truth will prevail eventually, even on Linkedin.

Bryan A
Reply to  bigoilbob
May 15, 2022 10:11 pm

I was going to recommend that perhaps it is Time for Elon to buy them out too but the NYSE DeListed them back on Dec 19 (2016)

Reply to  bigoilbob
May 15, 2022 10:50 pm

”This is a private enterprise unwilling to enable silly nonscience”

LOL. So indisputable facts are ”silly nonscience” and alarmism is the go to source. Yeah right, pull the other one bigolblob, it plays jingle bells.

Andrew Wilkins
Reply to  bigoilbob
May 15, 2022 11:25 pm

If you’re going to try that “private company” thing, that was what the loony left on twitter used to say when someone even slightly to the right of Chairman Mao was banned. Then Musk bought Twitter and suddenly you lunatics are shouting about how it’s not fair that Twitter is, um, privately owned. The hypocritical left in a nutshell.

BTW unlike all of your other comments this one of yours is relatively comprehensible. I presume you decide to make a change and stay off the gin this morning.

Reply to  bigoilbob
May 21, 2022 9:14 am

Ignorant, naive x 2 ^^

Pillage Idiot
Reply to  bigoilbob
May 15, 2022 3:46 pm

Shorter bigoilbob:

If those black people want to eat at the lunch counter, then they can just start their own diner!

Rich Davis
Reply to  Pillage Idiot
May 15, 2022 3:58 pm

Shorter big oily boob:
Duh! (Drool)

Reply to  Pillage Idiot
May 15, 2022 4:35 pm

Totally incomparable. Unlike that lunch counter, linkedin is a free forum. And every publishing enterprise has a right to curate their content. Linkedin’s Q counterparts certainly do.

Last edited 1 year ago by bigoilbob
Reply to  bigoilbob
May 15, 2022 5:13 pm

Bob, I know that you are genetically incapable of spouting anything other than the far left line of the day. But please for once, actually answer the question instead of your inartfull attempts at diversion.

How is censoring viewpoints that you don’t like any different from a restaurant rejecting customers that it doesn’t want to serve?

Reply to  MarkW
May 15, 2022 5:37 pm

How is censoring viewpoints that you don’t like any different from a restaurant rejecting customers that it doesn’t want to serve?”

A restaurant must serve anyone who shows up, and who does not break the rules of that restaurant. That’s our law. But unlike the restaurant, any publisher has a constitutional right to curate their content. Since this is a country with a stated devotion to a free press, it’s as much a right to not print something as to print it.

Don Perry
Reply to  bigoilbob
May 15, 2022 6:21 pm

Are they a platform or a publisher? Section 230 only protects platforms, not publishers. If they want the privilege of a publisher, then they are not entitled to section 230 protection from libel. That’s supposed to be “our law”. I pray it’s soon applied.

Reply to  Don Perry
May 15, 2022 6:48 pm

“If they want the privilege of a publisher, then they are not entitled to section 230 protection from libel.”

“Libel” is not the issue. Site curation is. So, AGAIN, which platform or publisher does not have the right to not publish what it doesn’t want to publish.? Not rhetorical, which?

For example, folks who wayback here tell us that Nick Stokes was cancelled for awhile. I’m guessing that since he’s now referenced here about 10 times for every post he actually writes, he was invited back by popular demand.

Last edited 1 year ago by bigoilbob
Don Perry
Reply to  bigoilbob
May 16, 2022 9:25 am

BozoBob, the point is that they choose to act as a platform when they want the protection of section 230 and act as a publisher when they want to censor. They CAN”T have it both ways. My gracious, but you are a fool (or is it tool?).

Reply to  bigoilbob
May 15, 2022 6:59 pm

As always, Bob defines right and wrong, legal and illegal based solely on what liberals say it must be;

The only reason why companies have to serve all, is because the courts have decided they must.

Bryan A
Reply to  bigoilbob
May 15, 2022 10:20 pm

comment image

John Endicott
Reply to  bigoilbob
May 16, 2022 9:17 am

A restaurant must serve anyone who shows up, and who does not break the rules of that restaurant. “

And the rules of the restaurant was “no non-white people served” (they even displayed that rule on a sign in their window for all to see before entering). So that’s OK then, by the logic of your post.

Reply to  bigoilbob
May 21, 2022 9:22 am

Um, no it isn’t.

Andrew Wilkins
Reply to  bigoilbob
May 15, 2022 11:29 pm

Well, no one is forcing them to eat at the lunch counter, are they? /Sarc
Your logic is right out the window, as per usual.

Reply to  bigoilbob
May 21, 2022 9:21 am

Totally comparable. Like that lunch counter, linkedin is a free forum. And every diner enterprise has a right to curate their customers. Diner’s counterparts certainly do.

Reply to  Pillage Idiot
May 21, 2022 9:20 am

badda bing!

Reply to  bigoilbob
May 15, 2022 5:08 pm

I’m trying to figure out is BoB is actually as dumb as his posts make him seem, or if he’s just playing the fool for money.

Ridiculing stupidity is part of “the market in action”.

In other words, David is already doing what BoB recommends, it’s just that BoB’s ideological blinders prevent him from seeing what is right in front of his face.

John Endicott
Reply to  MarkW
May 16, 2022 9:22 am

COUNTESS: My dear, I don’t think he‘s as stupid as he seems.
SCARLIONI: My dear, nobody could be as stupid as he seems.

As witty as that exchange was in Douglas Adam’s Doctor Who story “City of Death”, I’m afraid that in the bigoldboob ‘s case, he really is every bit as dumb as his posts make him seem, possibly even dumber.

Reply to  bigoilbob
May 21, 2022 9:13 am

Naive. Ignorant ^^

John Bell
May 15, 2022 3:01 pm

My neighbor has a “CLIMATE ACTION NOW” little sign in the front yard, with no solar panels on the roof, of course, and they use fossil fuels every day of their lives, of course. Hard to say what is in their minds, that fossil fuels are some right wing conspiracy that need to be defunded. they must think that some magical solution will trickle down from the omnipotent government. But they keep on using fossil fuels.

Reply to  John Bell
May 15, 2022 4:24 pm

The little sign is to replace having solar solar panels.
You don’t think Al Gore has solar panels, do you?

Reply to  John Bell
May 21, 2022 9:12 am

They are ignorant and naive. Act accordingly.

Rud Istvan
May 15, 2022 3:07 pm

The ‘Script’ is impervious to counterfacts. It sets forth their belief system. The best counter is simply ridicule. Two starter ridicule examples.

  1. 97% consensus means the science is settled. OK, then we don’t have to fund it anymore and the CSIRO ‘climate scientists’ can be let go. CSIRO: ‘we didn’t mean it was THAT settled’.
  2. ’Climate Models are reliable’. Well, they produce a tropical troposphere hotspot that does not exist, an ECS over twice observational energy budget methods, a warming rate over twice observed, and a resulting sea level rise acceleration that does not exist.

BTW, LinkedIn was started as a professional resume/recruiting tool (how I used it as a now retired CEO), not as an alternative opinion comment platform as Microsoft morphed it then moderated it.

But, were I still hiring, anyone that got moderated would be a real candidate.

Pat from kerbob
Reply to  Rud Istvan
May 15, 2022 3:39 pm

I have been moderated there several times but I still use it as it has been invaluable these last 5 years to find people as the oil gas engineering community has been blown up and dispersed here in calgary

Reply to  Rud Istvan
May 15, 2022 3:56 pm

What I’d like to see next month to celebrate the anniversary of 50 years of climate conjecture (started with UNEP, Stockholm June 1972) is a winners list of the “best prediction bloopers” for every year from 1972 that hadn’t come about by 2002 (the 30-year term of a climate definition).

(Or should that be the “most ridiculous climate predictions” made each

It goes without saying that to qualify for this list, entries must be predictions that haven’t shown any sign of coming true even to the present day (50 years later).

Andrew Wilkins
Reply to  Mr.
May 16, 2022 6:08 am

Here you go. A superb site supplying just what you need. You’re right: it’s always good to review the half century of the climate cabal getting it totally and hopelessly wrong

Reply to  Andrew Wilkins
May 16, 2022 10:37 am

Thanks Andrew.
I’ll see what I can use form this.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Andrew Wilkins
May 17, 2022 3:42 am

“it’s always good to review the half century of the climate cabal getting it totally and hopelessly wrong”

It’s essential. People should be shown just how wrong the climate alarmists really are.

Let’s see the geniuses at Linkedin debunk that list.

The climate alarmists have been getting it wrong for decades. Do not take advice from these people.

May 15, 2022 3:24 pm

I read that article too and did not know where to begon either. Decided to sleep on it. Look forward to your response which i encourage you to do. I’ve yet to be banned.

Gordon A. Dressler
May 15, 2022 3:57 pm

According to Wikipedia ( ), “Twinking is a type of behavior in role-playing games which involves deceiving other players about one’s playing abilities or achievements in the game. A player who engages in such behavior is known as a twink.”

Therefore, it is high time that LinkedIn—under their role-playing game of judging others—now judge themselves and rightfully change their name to TwinkedIn

Andrew Wilkins
Reply to  Gordon A. Dressler
May 16, 2022 6:09 am

Also from wonkypedia:
Twink is gay slang for a young man in his late teens to early twenties whose traits may include: general physical attractiveness; a slim to average build; and a youthful appearance that may belie an older age

Gordon A. Dressler
Reply to  Andrew Wilkins
May 16, 2022 6:46 am

Not sure why, but I guess you found a need to post that.

Andrew Wilkins
Reply to  Gordon A. Dressler
May 16, 2022 7:15 am

It just tickled me – a gay friend of mine was referring to a chap he knew as a twink. It’ll amuse my friend to know that his community has a crossover with the role- playing community.

May 15, 2022 4:05 pm

More atmospheric CO2 is a good thing. Why do alarmists hate plants and animals?

Tom Abbott
Reply to  JoeG
May 17, 2022 3:54 am

Alarmists live in a delusional world.

Janice Moore
May 15, 2022 4:36 pm

About that “script”….

1. CO2 up greatly. Warming not up greatly.

comment image

3. CO2 Is Plant Food

4. 97 Articles Refuting the 97% Consensus Propaganda

5. A. It was Warmer in the Past

B. 1998 Super El Nino Caused 2000-09 Warming – Now, It is Cooling

6. Climate Models Are Unfit, Unskilled and FAIL to Accurately Project Temperatures
comment image

(“Pervasive Warming Bias in CMIP6 Tropospheric Layers,” R. McKitrick and J. Christy, 15 July 2020, Abstract,

B. See e book, Climate Models Fail, by Bob Tisdale
Available free here:

7. Antarctica Ice Increasing and the Continent Is Cooling

8. Animals and Plants Can Adapt

9. No Warming Trend Since 1998 per Satellite Data

Last edited 1 year ago by Janice Moore
Reply to  Janice Moore
May 15, 2022 11:40 pm

Janice, nice overview, except the increase of CO2, which is impossible from warming oceans or you are violating Henry’s law.
The equilibrium between ocean surface and atmosphere changes about 12-16 ppmv/K at current surface temperatures. Not 120 ppmv/K…

Moreover, you are violating the carbon mass balance: humans emit twice the amount of CO2 as is measured as in increase in the atmosphere, thus nature is a net sink for CO2, not a source… The extra CO2 (as mass, not the original fossil CO2) doesn’t disappear in space…

Janice Moore
Reply to  Ferdinand Engelbeen
May 16, 2022 8:50 am

Dear Mr. Engelbeen,

The ice core data indicates that CO2 lags temperature increase by 1/4 cycle at all time scales.

Warming oceans outgass CO2 — lots of it. Given that natural CO2 sources and sinks are:

1) essentially in balance; and

2) natural sources and sinks are 2 orders of magnitude greater than human CO2 emissions;

it is implausible to conclude that human emissions are likely the cause of any net increase.

That is:

Human CO2 UP. Observed CO2 UNCHANGED.

Thank you for honoring me with a response.

Hope all is well with you and yours over there.

Take care,


Reply to  Janice Moore
May 16, 2022 12:55 pm

Dear Janice, we have been there before (many times, I am sure…).

  • Indeed in the past, CO2 lagged temperature, but the CO2/temperature ratio was not more than 8 ppmv/K for Antarctic temperatures or about 16 ppmv/K for global temperatures and the change was not more than 0.02 ppmv/year spread over 5000 years.
  • In the past 170 years CO2 increased with 120 ppmv with less than 1 K temperature increase, that is far faster and far beyond what Henry’s law dictates.
  • In the same period humans emitted over 200 ppmv CO2.
  • Natural CO2 exchanges are currently more sink than source, observed as well in vegetation (the earth is greening) as in the C (DIC) content of the ocean surface. A net sink can’t be a source, no matter how much is exchanged. Huge exchanges doesn’t imply huge changes…
  • Every year since 1958, the CO2 levels go up at average half human emissions, some years faster, other years slower, but always less than human emissions (except for a few borderline El Niño years).

Thanks for asking, I am still fine at 78, but unfortunately my wife passed away a few months ago at age 75. We still miss her every day…

Janice Moore
Reply to  Ferdinand Engelbeen
May 16, 2022 5:06 pm

Dear Mr. Engelbeen,

You make many good points. I am not going to address those I find “not proven.” There is a much more important issue to address.

Nothing matters more than family.

I am so sad to hear that you have had to bid “Adieu” to your dearest on earth.

Oh, Mr. Engelbeen…..

Only 75.

When you two promised, “‘Til death do us part,” my guess is you pictured yourselves walking along together into your eighties or even nineties. Having the period come before the end of the sentence adds to deep grief the shock of an unexpected horror.

In case you might possibly find it helpful, I recommend (highly) C.S. Lewis’ book A Grief Observed. He wrote it upon the death of his wife. The version with a forward by Madeleine L’Engle (herself widowed by the time she wrote it) is especially good, for she says some things in contrasting grieving a long marriage as hers was with a fairly short one (3.5 years) as Lewis’ was which you may find helpful.

You miss her every day. Of course. And will be…… As Lewis wrote, as with a leg amputation, after awhile, the initial sharp pain of separation softens — but, one remains a one-legged person.

Sorry for talking at you so much….. I can’t sit beside you and just be present, so I am trying to hug you with words…..

When Disraeli lost his beloved wife, he said that all he could bear was “either perfect sympathy or perfect solitude.”

May the Lord make His always-there presence especially real to you in the weeks and months to come.

With heartfelt sympathy and with prayers for comfort and peace and hope (of reunion, for, she has, as you know, not died — no one does — she has merely, as Billy Graham said, “changed addresses”),

Your ally for data-driven science,


Old Man Winter
May 15, 2022 5:58 pm

David- This article is depressing in that the The Team™ is just another BeeEss manufacturing cog
in the Libs Big Brother™ machine. It’s everywhere, including the Ministry of Truth™. While doom
& gloom is the normal for anyone opposing them, there may be a bright note I initially missed.

Last summer, you posted about climate scientists realizing that their models gave implausibly hot
forecasts of future warming. More recently, your post had Zeke Hausfather actually stating some
models were better than others. Both of these admissions by The Team™ I would consider as two
YUGE wins for getting climate discussions focused back on REAL climate science versus the
politically motivated “CO2 Magic Molecule Theory”. In other words, The Team™ was forced to blink
the long long-term efforts by you & many others having finally payed off. I in the long-term stare-
down between reality & fiction. I’d call it a reason to celebrate. I realize you’ll still face the strong
opposition you do- the slog will still be there. Sometimes knowing The Team™ can be forced to face
facts, too, can keep you motivated to keep “swinging the bat”. Thanks for all you do!

U.N. climate panel confronts implausibly hot forecasts of future warming
By Paul Voosen Jul. 27, 2021 Science Magazine

Use of ‘too hot’ climate models exaggerates impacts of global warming
U.N. report authors say researchers should avoid suspect models
4 MAY 2022 11:00 AM BY PAUL VOOSEN Science Magazine

Rud’s comment:

I enjoy your sense of humor, too. CELEBRATE! 🙂

Old Man Winter
Reply to  David Middleton
May 15, 2022 9:32 pm

Just some more ramblings from an older- not old- geezer. All the efforts of The Team™’s
Old Guard are geared toward keeping the “CO2 Magic Molecule Theory” alive & destroying
anyone who disagrees. Some like Zeke Hausfather, who is one of the sharpest tools in the
drawer, knows that but is a knowledge junkie who really wants to find out what makes our
climate tick. So he knows that the place to be is over here @ WUWT where the real
intellectual debate party’s happening! There are other junkies who want to make the scene,
too. So it’s wise to keep an eye out for those real scientists as this world is always full off
surprises. Isn’t it fun to be a conservative radical! 😮

A possible other bit of good news where the proof will be in the pudding cuz talk is cheap:

With that, I’ll sign off with another fave:

Andrew Wilkins
Reply to  Old Man Winter
May 16, 2022 6:16 am

That is a hell of a lot of hair right there.

Chris Morris
May 15, 2022 5:58 pm

I think the person’s position in Sales and Marketing of Software says it all. No engineering or real life physics knowledge -no analytical ability. Never had to make a cost/ benefit case.

Dan Pangburn
May 15, 2022 8:17 pm

This shows T & CO2 at the same magnitude scale as used in a plot of them during the last glaciation. It appears that Henry’s law determined CO2 level during the glacial period. The plots of T & CO2 after 1850 indicate that Henry’s law is no longer controlling the CO2 level.

current & paleo T CO2.jpg
Dan Pangburn
May 15, 2022 8:20 pm

As shown on this graph, measured water vapor (WV) has been increasing substantially faster than possible from just planet warming. Sect. 7 of
WV molecules have been increasing 7 times faster than CO2 molecules. (Sect 3)
The increase in WV can explain all of humanity’s contribution to climate change. Sect 17 to 19 of

TPW meas & H5 T thru Dec 2021 6.7%.jpg
Dan Pangburn
May 15, 2022 8:26 pm

Each data point on this graph is the measured average global temperature and measured average global water vapor for each month from Jan 1988 to Dec 2021. Average global water vapor increase explains all human contribution to average global temperature increase and is self-limiting.

H5 vs TPW anomalies.jpg
Mark Arundell
May 15, 2022 10:23 pm

Always found Linked In a pain – too much marketing by both the Site and members I have not interest in replying to. Thanks David for giving me the impetus to close my account.

May 15, 2022 11:48 pm

David, nice overview, but I disagree with the second link: the CO2 “kink” in the transition between firn and ice is real, not an artifact of any discrimination.

Etheridge e.a. (1996) measured CO2 top down from near the surface to closing depth and in ice from closing depth to rock bottom. CO2 levels in mixed firn and ice at closing depth were the same, measured with the same equipment (GC).

Here the overlapping graph:

Reply to  Ferdinand Engelbeen
May 16, 2022 9:37 am

The CO2 hockey stick from 1900 to present day is comprised of multiple datasets; atmospheric instrumental CO2 data, firn CO2 data, and ice core CO2 data. Firn and ice bubble CO2 undergoes different mixing processes with depth. CO2 in the firn diffusion zone is vertically mixed with CO2 in the atmosphere. This is the dominant process from 1960 AD to the top of the diffusion zone. In the bubble LIZ, CO2 mixing is more lateral and gradual as dispersion and Darcy’s law become the dominant factor. And finally, closed pores continue to compress with depth until true ice density of greater than 0.9 g/cm3 is obtained.

Is it fair to compare firn gas that is in vertical communication with atmospheric gas to gas trapped in bubbles no longer mixing with atmospheric gases? Many authors have documented gas smoothing in the firn layer due to vertical gas diffusion and gradual bubble close-off during the transition from firn to ice (Trudinger, 2002; Spahni, 2003; MacFarling, 2006; Joos and Spahni, 2008; Ahn, 2012; Fourteau, 2019; Rubino, 2019). To compensate for cores from different accumulation sites, a gas age distribution width or smoothing is modeled. For example, high accumulation Law Dome cores have a gas age average of 10-15 years, WAIS gas average is ~30 years, and DML is 65 years. Low accumulation sites such as Dome C and Vostok show that gas is average or smoothed over hundreds of years. This means that to compare atmospheric gas measurements to various ice cores a smoothing factor needs to be applied. However, most CO2 historical graphs simply tack on atmospheric CO2 to firn and ice CO2 without applying any smoothing. It may look nice, but atmospheric CO2 needs to be corrected to ice conditions.

Reply to  Renee
May 16, 2022 1:03 pm

Renee, agreed that ice core CO2 is smoothed at different levels, mostly due to the local snow accumulation and secondary to local temperatures, but all cores with sufficient resolution show the same HS.
That means that this HS is real, as good as the CH4 and N2O HS in ice cores are real…

Even over the past 800,000 years an increase and wane of 120 ppmv over a period of 340 years up and down would be noticed as an abnormal peak of over 30 ppmv…

Matthew Sykes
May 16, 2022 1:40 am

“97% of scientists say man is causing global warming”. Well, that isnt true, Doran Zimmerman found that many think man has a significant role. Define significant. Cumin is a significant flavour in many curries. It isnt the only flavour, and isnt even half the flavour.

And then there is a vast gulf between global warming and Climate Change.

In almost all measurable respects certainly mild warming is beneficial. (a degree or two) Increased plant growth, animal life etc. There is a reason the equator has such high biodiversity, it is warm.

So this SKS ‘fact sheet’ is fundamentally misleading, as it can only be.

May 16, 2022 4:45 am

I recently ditched my 20 yr LinkedIn account, as it had morphed into just another smarmy social media platform with a patina of professional networking. About the only people contacting me were marketers trying to sell me something.

David Elstrom
May 16, 2022 5:39 am

There is no depth the shameless tools in the Warmonger ranks won’t plumb.

May 16, 2022 6:20 am

I’m not even in the evil fossil fuel industry and I’m tired of the “evil fossil fuel paid conspiracy”.
Never mind that the big climate change NGOs: WWF, Greenpeace, Sierra Club, EDF, NRDC etc collectively spend billions promoting climate change.
Never mind that the Federal government funds climate change research, staffed by activists, as well as hundreds of billions for alternative energy that doesn’t work for base load.
No, it is the evil fossil fuel companies that are buying their way to obstructing climate change crusades even though I (nor anyone else) has ever seen a fossil fuel ad against climate change. Or that a significant fraction of the above NGOs income is from fossil fuel companies.

Danley Wolfe
May 16, 2022 8:41 am

With all the todo hubbub today on “disinformation” we need to put climate change disinformation rhetoric scare tactics including and especially by the UNFCCC but also ALL of the liberal media publications NY Times being a great example. NYT staff of writers on the topic of climate change numbers into the 20s and 30s all with the mission of spreading and expanding the fear of climate change meaning the end of the planet as we know it. We know this is a crock. Legitimate reporting is based on demonstrable science not models projecting out for e.g., 100 years predicting the end of the planet as we know it. STBS – stop the bull.

michael hart
May 16, 2022 8:53 am

LinkedIn is a company that billed me for money I had not authorized them to take, and then refunded only half of it after complaint.

Reply to  michael hart
May 21, 2022 7:50 am

Since I am 6yrs or so from retirement and will likely remain at the company I have been with since 1988, I don’t really care much about my linkeddum account. But LEFTISM authoritarianism is everywhere. Vote accordingly.

Lauchlan Duff
May 16, 2022 1:06 pm

There are elements of truth in Sceptical Science websites point 2 above. If one just takes the SSN#s 22-24 from 1985, they have decreased in magnitude whilst surface temps have still gone up, albeit with ENSO influenced rhythms. The upcoming SSN25 expected to peak by 2025 and SSN26 by 2035 should resolve the positive or negative TSI/SSN relationship with temperatures.

May 16, 2022 1:51 pm

I left linkedin because their censorship was arbitrary and political. I could have put up with that, perhaps, if they would just admit they censored what I wrote because of their bias. But they refused to give me any reason at all. A reason is required, IMHO.

As for the posts above, they are so incredibly stupid, it hard to pick one to refute.

Models successfully reproduce temperatures since 1900

Any glance at the temperatures (modeled and actual) from 1905 to 1940 shows this is BS.

May 16, 2022 1:52 pm

BTW, thanks for the post, David.

May 16, 2022 2:57 pm

I have “cancelled” LinkedIn, i.e. deleted my account and started to connect with my proffesional collegeus via Telegram instead. This is the way to start depriving those bastards of advertising money.

May 16, 2022 9:55 pm

”It’s exaggerated” seems to be the correct view ?

Tom Abbott
May 17, 2022 4:21 am

Skeptic: “It hasn’t warmed since 1998”

Skeptical Science assertion: “Every part of the Earth’s climate system has continued warming since 1998, with 2015 shattering temperature records”

Here’s the global chart, the UAH satellite chart.

comment image

As you can see, none of the years after 1998 are warmer than 1998. Some are substantially cooler than 1998. The year 2016, which NASA Climate and NOAA proclaimed was the “hottest year ever!” is statistically tied with 1998, for the warmest year in the satellite era. It has now cooled 0.4C since that time.

There was no “temperature shattering” going on according to the UAH satellite chart.

NASA Climate and NOAA are lying to the people. They are distorting the temperature record and presenting it as a scary reality. Don’t listen to these liars.

Mark Pawelek
May 17, 2022 10:00 am

Today, censorship, and propaganda, on a host of topics: climate, trans-people (TWAW), BLM, vaccines, COVID, … is driven by the ESG agenda. ESG = Environmental and Social Governance. This is organized by the largest asset managers in the world: the likes of BlackRock, Vanguard, …

Rogan: ESG’s Are the Reason for Woke Corporate Interests
Lindsay: The ESG Cartel | New Discourses Bullets, Ep. 6

Sometimes ESG scores are arbitrary. Nike’s score is twice Tesla’s – making it harder for an institution to invest in Tesla than Nike. So much for the E in ESG!

May 17, 2022 10:04 am

Elon must be keeping the watermelons up nights-
Elon Musk slams Biden: ‘The real president is whoever controls the teleprompter’ (

He’s a sublime sh#*stirring raconteur and laughing all the way to the bank milking the loaded climate changers with battery cars. If you’re a true revhead you can go along with him for the ride with a Tesla zoom zoom and laugh at the planet saver poseurs too.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights