Essay by Eric Worrall
According to the Guardian, climate deniers have influenced teens by infiltrating youtube with disinformation videos.
Third of UK teenagers believe climate change exaggerated, report shows
YouTube criticised for amplifying lies about the climate with disinformation videos watched by young people
Helena Horton Environment reporterTue 16 Jan 2024 22.00 AEDT
A third of UK teenagers believe climate change is “exaggerated”, a report has found, as YouTube videos promoting a new kind of climate denial aimed at young people proliferate on the platform.
Previously, most climate deniers pushed the belief that climate breakdown was not happening or, if it was, that humans were not causing it. Now, the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) has found that most climate denial videos on YouTube push the idea that climate solutions do not work, climate science and the climate movement are unreliable, or that the effects of global heating are beneficial or harmless.
Researchers from the CCDH gathered a dataset of text transcripts from 12,058 climate-related YouTube videos posted by 96 channels over almost six years from 1 January 2018 to 30 September 2023. They also included the results of a nationally representative survey conducted by polling company Survation which found 31% of UK respondents aged 13 to 17 agreed with the statement “Climate change and its effects are being purposefully overexaggerated”. This rose to 37% of teenagers categorised as heavy users of social media, meaning they reported using any one platform for more than four hours a day.
…
Imran Ahmed, chief executive of the CCDH, said: “Scientists have won the battle to inform the public about climate change and its causes, which is why those opposed to climate action have cynically switched focus to undermining confidence in solutions and in science itself.”
This mentality has seeped into UK politics, with rightwing politicians having campaigned for years to persuade the public that net zero is unachievable and too expensive, and that technologies including electric cars and heat pumps do not work. The prime minister, Rishi Sunak, has said recently that climate solutions are too expensive and rowed back on net zero commitments.
…
Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/jan/16/third-of-uk-teenagers-believe-climate-change-exaggerated-report-shows
What can I say? It’s not our fault if reality gives us plenty of evidence to refute nonsensical climate claims.
I mean, who can forget the hilarious cost blowout and failure, when German greens tried and failed to install a heat pump in their own headquarters?
Or the crazy energy price hikes, inflicted by politicians who claimed renewables are the cheapest form of power?
And let’s not forget the Chicago Tesla graveyard this weekend, caused by Tesla’s failing in the cold – nope, nothing to see here folks.
The fact is green solutions don’t work, and climate change isn’t a problem. It was always only a matter of time before teenagers realised this, and started rebelling against fake adult climate doomsday messaging.
Update (EW): The report from the Center for Countering Digital Hate is available here. The report appears to call for stepping up censorship and demonetisation of any content which criticises climate “solutions”, as well as content which criticises climate science. There’s a picture of Anthony Watts on page 20 of the report;
The New Climate Denial
How social media platforms and content producers profit by spreading new forms of climate denial.
…
2023 was the hottest year on record. Once unprecedented wildfires, floods, unbearable heat, and droughts are becoming normal to billions of people worldwide.2 It is difficult to deny the simple fact that our climate is changing in predictable and yet, still, even now, shocking ways. The awe we feel when Mother Nature bellows with rage can only be matched by our fear that her final judgment will be catastrophic for our species.
And yet, the sensible majority of us who seek to avert climate catastrophe find ourselves continually having to deal with a tidal wave of disinformation designed to delay action. These lies, welcomed, enabled, and often funded by oil and gas tycoons who benefit financially, are cynically used by political leaders to explain why they remain stubbornly incapable of taking urgent corrective action.
In this Enlightenment battle of truth and science versus lies and greed, those on the side of science appear to have succeeded in persuading the public that anthropogenic climate change is a reality, which is why those who seek to undermine climate science have shifted strategy.
In this report, for the first time, researchers at the Center for Countering Digital Hate have quantified the startling and important rise over the past five years in what we call “New Denial” — the departure from rejection of anthropogenic climate change, to attacks on climate science and scientists, and rhetoric seeking to undermine confidence in solutions to climate change. “New Denial” claims now constitute 70% of all climate denial claims made on YouTube, up from 35% six years ago.
…
Read more: https://counterhate.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/CCDH-The-New-Climate-Denial_FINAL.pdf
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Only a third? British schoolchildren lack the skills to verify their beliefs.
Only a third had “where-vitals” to tell it. Or just did not care.
Is there any particular reason to believe this, or any poll in which some answers are obviously more equal than others in the eyes of those with power?
Skills or no skills you need good information. Seems 1/3 of the kids have had new access to good information. Now is a perfect time for lots of good information because there is growing threat fatigue in the West.
Climate propaganda has become so meta-communicated at the level of archetypal images/music and discursive narratives that it doesn’t even have to make a direct claim that can be rationally opposed. In addition, there is the obvious and endless threat references at every level of the media down to the social media echo chamber that supports the forgone conclusion of the climate change threat. I don’t care how educated you are in critical reasoning or how smart you are, if there is nothing out there to counter the propaganda tsunami, even the best and brightest might conclude the Arctic has been without ice for the past 10 years,(I saw this for myself working with medical professionals doing an informal email questionnaire two years ago).
This is the reason WUWT is so important. It’s one place someone can receive enough good information to rationally work it out for themselves.
When I happened on WUWT in 2008, I assumed global warming was a fact but considered the threat narrative that accompanied it a political tool. The science on WUWT was what I needed. Since then, the world has gone mad.
Cut your Carbon or ELSE… “NO Pressure” 10:10 Commercial
Needs to be brought up again from time to time just to remind everyone that this is exactly how those dangerous idjits actually think.
Hopefully by next year it’s half.
On the other hand, the brainwashing might be working. ‘Climate change’ is their ‘word’ of the year.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/67986655.amp
Nobody at the Oxford University Press or the BBC noticed that “Climate change” is two words?
Doesn’t that make you feel all warm and fuzzy?
No, it worries me that bodies which are so influential can be so stupid…
Einstein was right, the only thing in the universe which is limitless is human stupidity.
Mind control works like a charm especially with the algorithmic feed back loops to refine and personalize it. The social media echo chambers whip up false realities like nothing else seen before.
Well, that means 2/3 of the teens do NOT think it is exaggerated. Ugh. The poll they cite would be interesting to read. The main takeaway I see is that the growing body of responses to the nonsense is proving effective, and no one line of argument works on its own — go for the preponderance effect. All the responses are valid — the observed changes are minimal and natural at least in part, and the demands of the fanatics are insane and counterproductive.
The biggest problem with the ‘demands of the fanatics’ is that they don’t work and never can. No means of overcoming renewable intermittency. Insufficient minerals to electrify vehicles. No diesel alternative for heavy trucking, construction, mining, forestry, ag. No kerosene alternative for commercial jet aviation. That is why those demands are insane.
“No diesel alternative for heavy trucking,”
I see where California is not going to enforce the new rule about electric trucks for now.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/28/business/energy-environment/electric-trucks-port-california.html
“The rule was to take effect at the start of the new year, but California’s Air Resources Board said on Thursday that it would not begin enforcement until it had received approval from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.”
end excerpt
All California Air Resources Board voting members are unelected political appointees. They make the rules and then break the rules. This rule was made on June 25, 2020. Changing rules and not enforcing rules is not a new occurrence for the Air Resources Board. Apparently, there is incompetence in the rule making process or that would not happen.
The transition to electric trucks is going to be a fiasco and it is going to cost all of us more money because a lot of things are shipped through California.
This is what happens when your highest priority is reducing CO2.
Until there is a truly innovation electrical storage and distribution system, which doesn’t exist, let’s forget about bad solutions and renew the demand for cheap energy. We have plenty of Natural gas… let’s go for it.
If a truly innovative electrical storage and distribution system did exist, it would not only solve the intermittency problem but also make the use of fossil fuels more efficient and cheaper for the consumer. And for the nutty anti-carbon enthusiasts they would get a smaller carbon foot print.
False dreams cost tons of money and do damage. Lets deal with reality and push for cheap energy solutions with whatever input makes sense… nuke, natural gas, Solar, coal etc, whatever is the cheapest.
Well, if they think it’s “complete horse dung”, then it’s not “exaggerated”, is it?
When I was a teenager, the more I was told what to believe the more determined I was to think for myself and believe something else. Have teenagers really changes that much?
Yeah, whatever happened to that youthful rebellion? That “don’t trust anyone over 30” attitude?
The Guardian is concerned that a third of schoolchildren has been shown to be unacceptably resistant to brainwashing.
Next step: Mandatory re education, possibly in special camps along with their parents?
Every time I click on the Guardian to verify one of their stupidities, I get a begging for funds message because readership is so down. A step in the right direction
“Down” as in depressed?
That would make sense 😉
If you read the comments on their Climate Change articles, that’s pretty much what it is. “We’re doomed, aren’t we?” comments are the most upvoted.
Funny no one ever mentions climate related deaths are down 98% over the last 100 years. In my books it seems to be getting better for kids and humanity. Drill baby drill!
If only Gates, would stop funding them
No.
The parents will be re-educated separately.
The children will be taken away from their parents. As is, for example, threatened if parents don’t support their children’s desire to achieve the impossible and change their s?x.
Also next step, greater censorship of counter narrative ideas and discussion, it will only get more draconian as resistance increases.
Considering the amounts of BS that the BBC and The Guardian spew out regarding the environment in general, it’s surprising the number’s that high. The reality is that the teens and the general public worldwide are much more skeptical about media hysterics in the first place, particularly when the climate extremes are usually occurring somewhere else. In addition, the same public is a lot more resilient and better prepared for such extremes simply because there have been infrastructure improvements that have helped withstand them and modern Internet technology plus radio and TV reports help prepare people take defensive measures. As for the teens, if they don’t seem overly concerned about the “climate crisis”, it’s because, like the rest of the population, they have more pressing priorities and don’t intend to make the big lifestyle changes that the eco-alarmists try to convince us are essential to save the planet.
Exactly so. This barrage of propaganda has been going on for more than three decades. That’s as long as the very worst of the Communist propaganda in the Soviet Union. When you barrage people with garbage for sufficiently long that the falsity starts to become apparent, it loses its effect. By the 1980s, no one in the USSR believed Soviet propaganda. So it is with all the totalitarian efforts; sooner or later everyone dismisses them as worthless.
In the news. there is no truth
And in the truth there is no news
Pravda & Isvestia
Too much Chicken Little sky is falling and Boy cried wolf might have something to do with it. After 40 years of failed climate alarm, folks begin to notice.
Arctic ice is speaking, “I’m not gone yet.”
https://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
And they are still using the out of date 1981 to 2010 average for comparison.
Their chart is fraudulent.
That’s it exactly! If someone keeps telling you something (especially something bad) is going to happen and it never does, you eventually stop listening to them. Kind of like end of the world cults….those who say the world will end in some upcoming year, and yet it doesn’t, and so on and so on.
Having been a victim of once being young and being told not to trust anyone over 30, I can understand kids not trusting claims made over 30 years ago that have not come true.
Yeah, this is what money can buy, and all the industry funded think thanks, all those clown politicians, all those clownish journalists get you this far. You’ve been able to instill doubt in… British teenagers! Science denial is trendier than ever! Okay, the diehard deniers will find my post offensive, but anyway. Well, considering the amount of effort and money you deniers have put into it, I’m a bit surprised that only the third of British teenagers have doubts. ‘Cos in a sense you have won. 20 years ago no healthy person (outside the US) would’ve believed your bs. Nowadays it’s trendy. However, the problem (to you) is that reality bites, and the effects of climate change are getting more and more obvious.
It didn’t work for the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany. Why would it work for these goons?
You forgot the sarc tag—but arguably was not needed.
The “effects of climate change” are real and natural. Man made climate change is pseudo science.
“It is also shown, that the Earth-atmosphere system is in radiative equilibrium with a theoretical solar constant, and all global mean flux density components satisfy the theoretical expectations. The greenhouse effect predicted by the Arrhenius greenhouse theory is inconsistent with the existence of this radiative equilibrium. Hence, the CO2 greenhouse effect as used in the current global warming hypothesis is impossible”
https://scienceofclimatechange.org/wp-content/uploads/Miskolczi-2023-Greenhouse-Gas-Theory.pdf
A gentle caution. I dug deeply into Mizkolczi claims back when writing ebook Blowing Smoke. Decided not to include him at all, since his PhD credentialed Math was even then suspect in several ways.
Comment caveat: I chose not to dig into his most recent (IMO unlikely) paper claims for the same reason. Been there, done that.
His findings agree with other analysis including Dr. Christy’s 2016 work on the hot spot, Gray/Schwartz 2010 paper and my own investigation into the atmospheric boundary layer. I think his latest paper is definitely improved over the 2010 paper. I see nothing wrong with the math. Maybe you could be more specific.
See, Rud, what a little introspection gives you? To be honest, Miskolczi’s bs is just too obvious. How about all the others? Why don’t you give it a try?
How would someone as base-level ignorant, in any field of science or anything, as you are, have any idea about anything.
All you have is your own BS, by the bucketload..
You are fooling yourself, and absolutely no-one else.
Try taking your own advice.
If his mistakes are so obvious that please explain exactly where he went wrong. Anything less is admission that you were lying and are a completely dishonest, child abuser.
“Science denial is trendier than ever!”
You know that better than any of us, fool.
I know you better than any of you, fool.
YOU have been proven absolutely IGNORANT on every facet of science.
You have absolutely ZERO scientific counter or understanding
You are just throwing slime and BS into the wind. !
Like most climate alarmists, he defines science as anything that supports what he has been told to believe.
It’s ok, Sunshine. Jesus loves you.
Is there even one climate alarmist who has even a shred of self awareness?
What money? The money has been pouring into the coffers of the green activists, eco-loons and climate change lobby groups. They are the ‘well-funded’ groups, not sceptics.
As to ‘the effects of climate change are getting more and more obvious’ – this is why more people are ignoring rants like yours, there are no obvious climate change effects. People see the usual ranting, incoherent shouts from Greenies and just ignore them now, you’ve had your day and are fading into the background, an irrelevance.
Science requires skepticism. What you are describing as “Science” is really Scientism, a quasi-religion in which you “believe The Science”. This is utterly anti-scientific, it’s a cult. This cult is waning though, as the AMO and PDO move into a cooling phase, the amount of “adjustment” needed to keep the “data” showing increasing warming will exceed credulity and it will all fall apart. This will happen fairly quickly and most of the prior adherents to the faith will then claim that they never believed it at all.
“cult”
Mark, you have a faulty keyboard 😄
Hilarious, how many times you deniers have predicted cooling in the last several decades.
Hilarious, how you deniers are completely unable to understand how these things are done. Even anomalies, this simple and straightforward transformation, is beyond your grip.
Your ignorance is again shown by everything you say.
Only DENIER here is you…. a gormless scientific non-entity.
You have proven you have ZERO understanding of anything remotely related to reality or science.
How many disasters have you climate alarmists predicted, that haven’t come to pass?
Do you buy your koolaide by the case or by the barrel.
You climate alarmists have been making the claim that there is a huge amount of money in climate skepticism, but despite many researchers trying to actually find this money, nobody has been able to actually find it.
YOu simply can’t bring yourself to admit that the science does not support what you want to believe.
If the same amount of money was invested in climate scepticism, we’d’ve won by now.
Really? 🙂
Yes.
So, no evidence
Just your childish imagination.
Typical AGW cultist idiot, never able to produce any evidence of anything.
Almost certainly in the paid trough of some far-left totalitarian billionaire.
And sucked into believing you are “saving the planet”.. when in fact every action you support, is destroying it.
His handlers have told him it’s true, therefore it is true.
Anyone who disagrees is a science denier.
Translation, I can’t support my claim, but my pride won’t let me admit it.
Nothing offensive about your post, as it is based totally on ignorance and brain-washed stupidity. !
“AGW Belief” is the fad.. a mindless anti-science brainwashed idiocy…
… as you have just shown in your pathetic little science and reality free rant..
Are you one of the clowns from.. “Just stop us idiots”, “stinkie-rebellion”… …
… or one of the other far-left billionaire-funded climate groupies ??
Despite the billions being funneled into these various groups, the groupie will still proclaim that it’s the other side that has all the money.
“ However, the problem (to you) is that reality bites, and the effects of climate change are getting more and more obvious.”
I wonder how many ancient high priests said something to that effect as they demanded more sacrifices and bloodshed in order to appease various who were thought to prevent bad weather?
Such is human nature to look to blame other people for things that are outside of our control.
It really is amazing how weather events that have been happening since time began, are proof that this time, they were caused by CO2.
“Science denial”
Who is denying science?
Which science are those people denying?
What exacting are we denying?
Pray tell.
You can’t even tell, this is part of the point. This tiring bs here about how science work illustrates this well. Stuff like “there can be no consensus in science” etc.
You certainly can’t tell us what we are denying, that you can back up with any actual real science.
Next you will be accusing people of denying the existence Snow White and the Big Bad Wolf.
That is what the AGW scam is analogous to… children’s fairy tales.
So totally suited to your mentality.
Oh dear.. the anti-science you crap on about really is deep-seated , isn’t it
Still talking up a FAKED consensus…
Is that all you really have. !!
It is obvious that you wouldn’t have the vaguest clue how real science operates.
I see that you still have no idea how actual science works.
Actual science requires data and proof.
Storms that have happened before, do not prove that this time they were caused by CO2.
Warming that began over 100 years prior to the increase in CO2, does not prove that CO2 is going to cause damaging warming.
Warming that is still cooler than 90% of the last 12,000 years, is not proof that life on this planet is in danger.
You didn’t answer the questions!
I’ll answer them for you
None of us is denying science, except perhaps for the climate worriers
Actually, I did, see my responses to Mark BLR below. Your denial is multiple, from pseudo-scientific articles to empty bsing about doubts in anything and everything. I think, Mark BLR has come to his senses in this. Eg. I asked him whether he had doubts in the Law of Conservation of Energy, for example. He had to answer a “no”. The interesting thing is that scientists know very well that this law may not hold but, of course, in any practical setting, this has exactly zero consequence.
The main problem is that anyone simply asking a question is immediately labelled a “Denier ! ! !”.
The whole point is that someone asking a question is seeking clarification, they are the very people who have not made up their minds yet.
It is only when someone has decided what “The Truth” (copyright Jack Nicholson) is, when they have decided what to “believe”, that they stop asking questions.
One of the defining characteristics of “The Scientific Method” (TSM) is that its practitioners never stop questioning their axioms.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
“The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.” — Carl Sagan
“There are no forbidden questions in science, no matters too sensitive or delicate to be probed, no sacred truths.” — Carl Sagan
“The sciences do not try to explain, they hardly even try to interpret, they mainly make models. By a model is meant a mathematical construct which, with the addition of certain verbal interpretations, describes observed phenomena. The justification of such a mathematical construct is solely and precisely that it is expected to work, that is correctly to describe phenomena from a reasonably wide area. Furthermore, it must satisfy certain esthetic criteria – that is, in relation to how much it describes, it must be rather simple.” — John von Neumann
“Science is a differential equation, religion is a boundary condition.” — Alan Turing
“Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt.” — Richard P. Feynman
“I would rather have questions that cannot be answered than answers which cannot be questioned.” — Richard P. Feynman
And finally …
“I hate quotations. Tell me what you know.” — Ralph Waldo Emerson
Well, it depends on the question 🙂 BTW, science is not dependent on persuading outsiders but persuading scientists by giving a coherent picture. This has already happened whether you deniers like it or not.
Yeah, right, but axioms are axioms ‘cos we have an extreme confidence in them. Extreme consensus, if you like it. So good luck questioning e.g. the law of the conservation of energy, an axiom in each of the 3 mathematical models (see your quote from von Neumann) of Physics.
Again, I’m not even saying that energy conservation is The Definite Truth. It may be wrong and there are scientific theories out in the wild where it doesn’t hold. What I’m saying is that in current science this fits extremely well with measurable reality (to this and that nr of decimal digits), giving a coherent picture. Doubting this just ‘cos you want to doubt is futile.
Now of course there are fields where confidence is much less, like climate science. But this doesn’t mean you can freely bs. Most of the stuff here is just that, bs, like “there is no global average temperature” etc. There are good questions, and we see the outlines of the answers, too, this is the dreaded “consensus”.
Translation, as long as the cult leaders agree, it is remains science.
If you can’t convince outsiders, but only those who already agree, then you have lost the argument.
It’s just that you aren’t smart enough to see it.
BTW, the claims of consensus are as bogus as the rest of the claims of the so called climate scientists.
Scientific truth is not dependent on whether you can convince outsiders. I don’t think this is something I have to argue for. Anyway, on the light side, unfortunately, most people are extremely ignorant in most fields. You simply can’t convince anyone. Just to demonstrate, quantum mechanics is so complicated that a tiny fraction of people can understand it.
I hope you admit, Mark, that there’s consensus about the Law of Conservation of Energy, right? 😉 You know, the thing that is a so called “empirical law”, ie. it is the result of observation, ie. there’s a minuscule chance that it doesn’t hold. But I haven’t found anyone who doesn’t believe it. Ie. the consensus is extremely strong.
Again.. just wordy idiocy.
You remain totally ignorant of actual science.
Talking more like a low-end humanities student trying to pretend you understand science.
You actually have absolutely no scientific evidence to back up anything you say….because what you say is just a load of irrelevant garbage.
As usual, you’re wrong. I’m a high end engineering professional (MSc EE).
“. . . quantum mechanics is so complicated that a tiny fraction of people can understand it.”
“Anyone who claims to understand quantum theory is either lying or crazy” –usually attributed to Richard Feynman
Everyone is incredibly DUMBER from reading you incoherent garbage.
You have made it very clear you have absolutely ZERO understanding of real science.
Nor have you anything but mindless platitudes to back up anything you say.
1) Some fine examples of the “appeal to authority” logical fallacy.
2) There is no such thing as a “scientific truth”.
One definition of “paradigm” I saw in the past went something like :
“The theory accepted as the least-wrong explanation by most people working in that specific domain”.
I like to appeal to authority ‘cos in scientific matters scientists are the authority. I find it extremely unlikely that a few guys bsing in a blog (and can’t get even simple things right like averages) are right in some fundamental matters. Furthermore, this is not some kinda blind faith in some far away authority. Every time I check things it turns out that the authority was right, as expected.
Well, maybe there is… Like the fundamental laws of physics. I wouldn’t call them falsehoods 🙂 Actually, “scientific truth” is something that fits well with observations (to a certain number of decimal digits).
So far every time I have asked for concrete examples of what the person who says things like that actually has in mind they end up admitting only to things on the level of
“CO2 is a GHG”
or
“The ‘human fingerprint’ of AGW theory = The troposphere will warm, the (lower) stratosphere will cool”.
Please provide just one concrete example of you “checking, and it turned out the authority was right” in the domain of “climate science”.
Two, among others: why and how the Antarctica is warming (or rather like melting), and the breakdown of downwelling radiation. FYI I have never doubted scientists, I’m just curious.
Again, bsing won’t get you too far. The denialist crowds’ funding is extremely well documented. Their accusations against scientists have all turned out to be (as expected) bs.
In science the funding source is completely irrelevant.
The only thing that matters is “Is the conclusion 2 + 2 = 4 ?” or “Is the conclusion 2 + 2 = 5 ?”
Exacly. This is why the funding source of science deniers is the interesting thing here. BTW, why do you accuse scientists with agreeing with their funding source if that’s irrelevant in science?
Assumes motivation, always a perilous first step.
“People in a cult don’t know they’re in a cult. But everyone else can tell.” — Oliver Markus Malloy
“The whole point of science is to question accepted dogmas.” — Freeman Dyson
“Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt.” — Richard P. Feynman
Richard Feynman also came up with the following commentary about what constitutes “Science” :
Attached is a digram of two versions of “The Scientific Method”.
Note that at the top of the left flowchart is the box “Ask a question”.
Be sure and check the contents of the last box on the right flowchart …
Just to rub the main point in, TSM does not consist of a list of immutable “scientific truths / facts”, it is a continuous process.
One reason to keep coming back to WUWT is that it if full of people who “Think of Interesting [ to me ] Questions”, and then go on to explore those questions and provide references and/or methodology so other people can follow up if they so desire … notably Willis Eschenbach, whose articles here almost always make me go “Hmmmmmm …”.
Again the usual tiring bs. This is just another pretex you use against science. Yes, this is a process, but at every stage, at every point in time we have a huge set of stuff what we accept. And contrary to what you deniers bs about, there’s no 180 degrees turn in these. Not in modern science, and this is not the time of Galilei, however you try to push this bs. FYI, in Galilei’s time the scientific method was not known. Now it is. The scientific truths aren’t invalidated nowadays, they are refined with more conditions. Just like the Newtonian model (which is still widely used today) is known to be faulty.
Again with the assumption that I must be “anti-science” !
This being aimed at someone who has provided you (and everyone else reading this sub-thread) with several versions of diagrams / flowcharts of “The Scientific Method (TSM)”, and demonstrated a notable fondness for the thoughts of Richard Feynman on TSM, science and scientists.
Do you really think that this meme level whatever gives you a free ride for bsing? FYI scientists don’t muck around with flowcharts about the scientific method. They follow it.
See above about bsing. But okay, a question: do you have serious doubts in the Law of Conservation of Energy? I know very well that it may not hold but I’m kinda not bothered by this fact, and in everyday matters, even if it doesn’t hold, the difference is likely well-well beyond measurement error. Okay, this is just an illustration how empty the bragging of you deniers is about these matters. You have to do that because you have to find some pretex why you don’t want to accept science. But this is the only reason.
No.
?
You deniers say that you have the right to question everything. I pointed out that this is just an empty thing, and you deniers only say that because this gives you a pretext to “question” science. ‘Cos whenever someone says that this or that has been scientifically settled and there’s no use in bsing about it, you come up with this tiring tirade of “never stop questioning blablabla”.
“I would rather have questions that can’t be answered than answers that can’t be questioned.”
I see, the temptation for a little bsing is irresistible 😉
Where’s the BS? You disagree with Feynman?
Why on Earth do you think I disagree with Feynman? Because I can’t stand your empty memefication of him? I’ve just demonstrated to Mark that you deniers use these quotes without thinking through what they mean. Just for sobering you: how do you question an answer in science? That should be a scientific thing, right, with appropriate evidence etc. You deniers just are notoriously bad in that.
Wow, a simple quote got you quite riled up.
It is clear that you simply reflexively attack anyone who responds to you. How childish.
You would like that, right? 😉
There is truth in this. But I have to point out that you guys here very rarely respond. Ad hominems, attacks, baseless accusations, mindless parroting long debunked bs etc are the norm. I have to give credit to Mark BLR ‘cos despite my quite hostile style (well, I have to admit this) we have had a kinda change of thought, and he hasn’t lost his temper. It’s extremely rare here.
Your climate delusion is noted.
Center for Countering Digital Hate. Who knew that posting skeptical climate facts comprised digital hate? What is meant is they hate people factual stuff that counters their climate religion.
“Scientists have won the battle to inform the public about climate change…”
Really?
Looks like climate science has LOST the battle, not won it.
The good news is that despite all the climate indoctrination in schools and MSM, 1/3 of youngsters aren’t buying it. The countering digital hate gang hates that.
AND all the supposedly dying corals at Stone Island are increasing.
Facts are always digital hate. Digital faith is the must-have.
Darn the internet. ‘They’ cannot control an internet that can post researchable facts. They hate that.
Those on the left have a long history of defining any comment that they disagree with as hate speech.
When was hate digitized? I’d like to see the assembly language for that one.
Is hate a jpeg, or more like a png?
Do the survey with the power turned off with warnings from the grid operators in winter.
“climate breakdown” what a phrase! They are so desperate to try to find a wording that will convince everyone, and yet the opposite is happening. YES! But that is all they have and it is funny to watch them double down again and again.
You beat me to it. I commented on that phrase too, but before I saw your post. Only a lunatic could come up with such a phrase!
“They are so desperate to try to find a wording “
That’s exactly what this has been for at least the last three decades. It’s a desperate fishing around to try to find the right sales pitch to unload the garbage they are selling. “Climate crisis”, “climate breakdown”, “climate change”, it all adds up to a failing sales pitch. And because it’s been failing for so long they are getting desperate. The old Soviet commissars of the early 1980s must have felt the same way, “why is no one believing the s**t we are pumping out on Pravda?”
And then the body-bags started coming home in the thousands from Afghanistan. Reality always comes back to bite, hard.
So it didn’t work for the Soviets, it didn’t work for the NSDAP, and now it’s not working for this gang either. Who knew?
But it’s not funny. These cretins are dangerous just like the above-mentioned.
That’s why I always refer to their ORIGINAL alarmist threat of Global Warming which can be quantified and thus shown to be harmless.
On the other hand “extreme weather” has ALWAYS occurred yet seems to be effective in alarming the sheep.
Sounds like 2/3rds of the kids need to gain some education.
A third of students believe climate change is exaggerated. Seems to me people of all ages are the same everywhere: Here in the US 1/3rd of us can think and we are Republicans, 1/3rd of us are Independents who don’t think, and 1/3rd of us are democrats who can’t think.
Your statement is true. Unfortunately, the useful idiots will ruin it for the rest of us.
I’m wondering how the same logic pans out in UK politics…
Please make that a capital ‘D’, Democrat.
There is no democracy left in the Democrat party.
How the heck can the elites control the peasants without proper mind control? Those who do not buy the big lie will be called out, or culled out.
Reality is finally reaching the next generation. We now need to ensure that every teacher and every school teaches real science and not tampered science. Quote: “If any theory or hypothesis does not agree with observation or experiment then it is WRONG”. R Feynman
What’s a ‘climate breakdown’? And what I would like to see are the names of the people making millions, or billions, of dollars, Euros etc. pedaling windmills and solar arrays. In Canada, one of ‘those people’ is a former president of the Liberal Party, the party of big green here.
A layman’s term for climate breakdown is “weather”.
I think of ‘Climate Breakdown’ as what happens when the atmosphere gets ‘sucked out into space’ by the vacuum there like my 5-year-old self used to worry about.
I think it’s a type of dance.
Said a better way, climate alarmists have convinced 2/3 of the teenagers that the climate emergency is real. That is really sad.
It’s no accident that public education has been deteriorating for at least the last 30 years.
“Now, the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) has found that most climate denial videos on YouTube push the idea that climate solutions do not work, climate science and the climate movement are unreliable, or that the effects of global heating are beneficial or harmless.”
Okay, so there is nothing controversial about those claims. Renewables need fossil fuels backup or the grid doesn’t work. To be fair, Gang Green didn’t know that until they successfully inflicted harm on the fossil fuel industry creating a shortage and driving prices sky high. This made renewables grids astronomically expensive: more expensive to manufacture windmills and solar panels (need fossil fuels to make the darn things), more expensive to ship and install (diesel equipment, concrete foundations with steel rebar). ✓
Climate scientists have never got a single forecast even remotely correct (demise of Arctic Ice, Westside Hwy under 10 feet of seawater, children won’t know is, Himalayan glaciers dry up, perpetual drought in California, Texas, the sahel, Australia …No more ‘snows of Kilimanjaro)….✓
Destruction of habitat (The Great Global Greening increases global tree and other plant growth cover by over 30% thanks to fossil fuel burning, burgeoning harvests have doubled and redoubled food production on 20% reduced land use. Plus elevated CO2 impart drought resistance The Bengal Tiger, in decline for multi decades has since rebounded 28% in India and 10% in the Ganges delta of Bangladesh since 2005. Bees doing great, polar bears never better, ..✓
We know that up-down guesses should produce successes around 50%. To be wrong 100% shows skulduggery is at play.
How dare they expose innocent children to the truth?
“Third of UK teenagers believe climate change exaggerated, report shows”. That doesn’t mean that two-thirds believe it is not exaggerated. There would be a lot of don’t-know teenagers who aren’t even interested. Given the relentless propaganda over so many decades, a third is a pretty impressive outcome.
Don’t forget the “don’t care” crowd.
If teenagers today are anything like they were when I was one, the apathy crowd is usually one of the largest.
One of Anthony’s favorite people is involved with this project.
– – – – – – – – –
“This study centers on data analysis performed by an AI tool, CARDS, developed by academics Travis G. Coan, Constantine Boussalis, John Cook and Mirjam O. Nanko.”
Is that the John Cook that wears a Nazi uniform in his leisure time?
The former cartoonist.
Off topic apart from its connection to The Grauniad and their amazingly contrived thinking (as seen in this story)
Headline:”Climate crisis to increase cancer risk for tens of millions of people in Bangladesh
Just what, how does climate breakdown (the first 2 words in this story) cause Cancer – of all things?
>>It goes back to the 1970’s when vast numbers of Bangladeshi babies were dying because of ‘polluted water’
(Polluted by what we’re not told)
So Bangladesh sank large numbers of deep boreholes to find clean water, it worked and life expectancy skyrocketed.
But by 1990’s, they found that the borehole water was full of Arsenic.
(Dissolved by rainwater working on rocks from ‘Himalayan Uplift’ and chronic low level Arsenic does in fact cause cancer. haha – sometimes known as Soil Erosion)
Visit the story to be told that: Scientists say sea level rises, flooding and extreme weather will accelerate release of arsenic into water supply
But how, Dear Grauniad, how do those things affect water that’s been under the ground for 100’s and 1000’s of years
Especially when you say:“”It wasn’t a problem when people drank surface water, because the surface water is in communication with the oxygen in the atmosphere and that makes the arsenic insoluble””
Back on topic: Is this what the teenagers have realised, that climate crusaders are trying so hard and are so dumb, they don’t realise when they contradict themselves even in just one single story?
If they can get something as simple as that wrong, is it beyond belief that they’ve got ‘Climate’ wrong too?
and its solutions – are they really so dumb as to think they can control the weather
The link:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/17/climate-crisis-increase-cancer-risk-bangladesh-water
We are winning. What evidence do these liars at Center for Countering Digital Hate offer that there is a climate crisis or that their preferred solutions work?
I saw two.
Number one they said THEIR experts said so and everyone knows that experts can’t be wrong.
Number two they say we have had bad weather and if we have bad weather now it is bound to get worse.
Number three they didn’t even mention computer models. Why? Do they even know about computer models?
These guys are on the ropes. They have nothing but lying, cheating and censorship.
Wonderful news!
is hating CCDH okay? The hate is mine not digital, except maybe this sentence. Given that the vast majority of communication these days is digital are we not supposed to hate anything or anybody? These folks clearly have no grip on reality. I hate that.
Looks like youngsters under 11 yo living in Australia have not felt adverse effects of global warming because there has been no global warming by this criterion. Geoff S
No-one on the planet has felt any human cause global warming for at least 45 years.
Plenty of urban warming, and jet engine warming…. but
… the only measurable atmospheric warming has been from totally natural EL Nino events.
And of course, the Medieval and Roman warm period were significantly warmer.
We are so lucky for the slight warming from the LIA.. bringing us to the Modern Tepid Period.
You forgot to mention all those SUVs that Romans and Medieval knights were driving back then.
Sorry Jim…. I always forget that aspect of climate history !!!
And then there were Egyptian and Minoan warm periods that were warmer than the two you mention. Let’s not forget that 5000 year long Holocene optimum which was warmer than all 4 of those warm periods.
The Little Ice Age, that the world is still recovering from, was the coldest period since the start of the Holocene.
Don’t tell dickie-boy that… He’ll have another tantrum !!
“2023 was the hottest year on record. Once unprecedented wildfires, floods, unbearable heat, and droughts are becoming normal to billions of people worldwide.2 It is difficult to deny the simple fact that our climate is changing in predictable and yet, still, even now, shocking ways. The awe we feel when Mother Nature bellows with rage can only be matched by our fear that her final judgment will be catastrophic for our species.”
So much to unpack here. First, notice how they always say “hottest”, not “warmest”. Second, even if 2023 was the warmest in modern record keeping, so what? It’s still below their dire predictions and was entirely caused by the spike in temperatures in the second half of the year as El Nino got into full swing and the N. Hemisphere had to shed all of that built up heat from the unusual multi-year La Nina that recently ended. Apparently anyone who’s been in the N. Hemisphere since the beginning of January can attest that this process is finished. We’re back in the Pleistocene now, folks.
Third, “unprecedented wildfires, floods, unbearable heat, and droughts are becoming normal to billions of people worldwide” because we’ve had them throughout human history. Ditto with the statement “It is difficult to deny the simple fact that our climate is changing in predictable and yet, still, even now, shocking ways”. That’s true, because again it’s always been the case.
“…her final judgment will be catastrophic for our species“. No, political leftists will be catastrophic for our species. That, and general stupidity.
Forgot to mention, sea ice is at a 21 year high.
https://dailysceptic.org/2024/01/16/arctic-sea-ice-extent-soars-to-highest-level-for-21-years/
Must be global warming…
But of course. With that crowd anything goes. Even when it’s too cold, this still must be because it’s too hot. Credo Quia Absurdum Est.
Do you sometimes get an impression they aren’t talking about the same species? Vegans, maybe?
counterhate? I will see your hate and raise you by two hates. 😉