Wasting Time with Climate Science?

Opinion by Kip Hansen — 1 August 2023

Here I ask a simple question.  Are we all wasting our time with climate science?  Reading about it, writing about it, worrying about it, fighting about it, arguing about it.

To my horror, I discover that I have been involved in this enterprise for far more than a decade, originally writing from the Caribbean where my wife and I were living on our sailing catamaran while doing various humanitarian projects.   Not quite as long as Anthony Watts, who started WUWT in 2006, but nearly.

Anthony’s efforts led him to be the owner and host of the world’s most viewed website on climate.  Given that WUWT represents the “minority report” on climate, that is a heck of an achievement.  Yet the jury is still out on how much of an impact on climate policy and public opinion this site, and the dozen or so other high impact climate skeptic websites, blogs, podcasts, etc.,  have made and will make.   

Much of the “climate science” being done, at least that small portion that reaches the public eye by appearing in the mass media, falls into that category which the honorable Dr. Judith Curry long ago labelled “climate science ‘taxonomy’” – “‘taxonomy’, i.e. research that is neither useful nor contributes to fundamental understanding”.  That type of so-called climate science is turned into climate alarm in spades, in diamonds, in hearts and in clubs – the whole deck.

I am speaking of the nonsense one reads and hears from NPR, PBS, BBC, NBC, AP, CNN, Reuters, ABC, the NY Times,  the Guardian, the Washington Post – many of whom have openly joined themselves into propaganda cabals ( and this one) dedicated to spreading misleading information about climate and climate change.  [A new one has just been announced: GRIST and AP. ]  Even when a media organization is not directly associated with one of these collaborative misinformation outlets, their editors and journalists have to face the wrath of those that are – there are few working journalists willing to fight the tide on climate alarmism.

Even the IPCC-boosting Pielke Jr. has been blasting the media for repeating absolutely false narratives on extreme weather — the very same media that repeats endlessly the mindboggling crazy pronouncements of U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres — “the era of global boiling has arrived.”

CLINTEL, has just published an extremely valuable book, “The Frozen Climate Views of the IPCC“, widely available, in softcover and eBook formats.  The book examines the IPCC’s AR6 and documents biases and errors in the Working Group 1 (Scientific Basis) and Working Group 2 (Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability) reports.  [Disclosure: I contributed one of the chapters – thus have a conflict of interest.]

We see the forked-tongued enemy.  A two-pronged approach.  First, the underlying science is slightly warped, slightly biased, misleadingly reported in the latest IPCC Assessment Report (AR6) WG1 and WG2.  A lot of this is simple confirmation bias and forced-consensus biasing.   The truth in is there, but one needs to dodge the rhetoric and look only at the data itself, which is mostly correct.   And then, the Summaries for Policy Makers (SPMs)  wildly misrepresent what the science sections have said and transmogrify it into something barely recognizable. 

From the SPMs, the politicians, media moguls, the Davos Crowd, the Green-New-Dealers, the Great Reset-ers, turn the SPM political opinions into outright lies and give the media propaganda cabals their marching orders.

And then, here we are.  Here I am.  I have written about 100 essays and opinion pieces here since 2020 alone.  I’ve been at it more than a decade.  There are a few dozen of others like myself who have researched and written endlessly, both in books and on the ‘Net,  to expose the lies, the disinformation, the misinformation, and the slimy political-shenanigans behind the efforts to “decarbonize” the economy of the world in the name of fighting global cooling, global warming, climate change, the climate crisis.

Every few years we see a slight shift towards the climate skeptic way of thinking in the general populace – and recently, a few nudges in our direction from governments.  The UK will drill-baby-drill to supply its own energy needs from its own resources.  Japan is re-opening nuclear power plants and building new ones.  In November last year, General Motors announced that it will stick with internal combustion engines.  India, the third-largest greenhouse gas emitter and the world’s most populous country , is planning for an expansion of its oil and gas sectors (even as it aims to hit net zero by 2070).   Those living in the real world realize that as Africa grows itself into prosperity, into the world of middle-class nations, it will do so on the back of coal and petroleum produced electricity.  Even relatively well-developed South Africa has acknowledged it needs to continue to burn coal for the present and foreseeable future.

I hope that readers see the obvious contrasts between the “reality” presented daily in the world’s mass media and what is actually happening in the world.  A large percentage of the material appearing on this website points out those contrasts, every single day.  Heartland, the CO2 Coalition, Clintel and other international climate skeptical organizations do so in print and through broadcasts, podcasts, YouTubes and interviews on wide-reaching news outlets. There are many climate skeptic oriented bloggers doing good work. Some of the “good news” is getting out there. 

Is what we do worthwhile?   Yes — It is always worthwhile to do what is right, to do what is good, to tell the truth, to fight the good fight against falsehoods and lies. 

But are we making an impact?  I can no longer tell – I am having a little bit of a “I think I’m burnt-out” stage.  I see a news article about a topic, and I think, “That’s utter claptrap, I’ll write about that.” Only to discover that I’ve already written about it a half-dozen times and really have nothing further to say than what I have already said.   I sometimes fear I just don’t have anything more to say, at all – and when I teach Public Speaking, I tell students, “If you don’t have anything to say —  don’t get up to speak or if you are already up, sit  back down.”

So, my question for the day, and please do comment, I promise not to get mad at you…..

Should I just sit back down and shut up? 

or

Should I keep banging away, just because ‘someone has to’?

# # # # #

Author’s Comment:

I guess the same question applies to all of us here….

This is, I hope obviously, a piece meant to stimulate discussion.  So, please, please, discuss.

On Pielke Jr.:  I like Pielke Jr.  He does good work.  He tells the truth as he sees it.  He is one of the most effective of the “climate skeptical voices”, albeit in his own way.  He is an IPCC-booster but even he thinks it needs serious reform. He has paid a heavy price for his temerity.  Read his substack.

And yes, I do think that there is also some nonsense published here – some even written by me.  That’s the price we pay for freedom.  But, the way I see it, we err in an honest search for truth.

I don’t expect to take too much of a role in the discussion, I have said what I have to say above. But, if your start a comment with “Kip…”, I’ll try to reply.

Thanks for reading.

# # # # #