The Attempt to Establish a Climate Ministry of Truth

There is no depth of mendacity to which the climate nomenklatura will not sink to quash science.

Scientific American steps in it
Andy May
By Andy May The left-wing Scientific American published a so-called review of Steven Koonin’s new book, Unsettled, by a number of prominent left-wing scientists. The article is headed by the…

 

Once-great SciAm has been unreadable, politically correct trash for decades.

 

Another move to corrupt the data.
Lies, Damned Lies, And Biden Fire Statistics
Posted on June 5, 2021 by tonyheller

 

Attempts to suppress climate dissent from the so-called consensus continue.
Fact Checking the Fact Checkers
Guest Blogger
This is a re-post from the CO2 Coalition, here. Re-posted with permission. [Ed. Note] The number of opinion pieces disguised as “Fact Checks,” and the use of them to censor…

 

That is a fine article for those worried to read.

I shall put more time into that web site than our local newspapers where most of the fear mongers get their data.

 

Excellent article on fires.

 

The Swiss are all in for propaganda.
“Beating Climate Change Into Our Heads”…Swiss Office Issues Heat Warnings For Days Averaging 25°C!
By P Gosselin on 13. June 2021

Share this...
“Another hot day in the forecast for Bern, Switzerland, today. Meteorologists have issued another heat warning as temperatures are expected to average 25°C in Bern today. Authorities advise people to stay indoors and to drink plenty of fluids.”

This is what weather forecasts in Switzerland may sound like very soon as the country goes full Orwellian.





25°C is dangerous heat, Swiss authorities say. People in Bern need to be careful today as the temperature has reached 25°C. Image cropped from accuweather.com.

A daily average of 25°C, i.e. about room temperature, is now considered in Switzerland high enough to issue a “heat warning”. . . .

 

"The UN Climate Authority has announced an increase in the ambient temperature that is considered harmful from 30C to 25C."

 

I guess Mediterranean vacations will now be risky.

 

Maybe this will rescue creationism: human beings couldn't have evolved in the tropics, it's too hot for them to survive there.

 

It's kind of sad, how you've all had to retreat from the real world. I almost feel bad about opening the door into this denier SafeSpace and letting all the reality leak in.

I'm sure your leaders told you that, and given how you want to believe it so very badly, you do. Confirmation bias, your picture is next to it in the dictionary. However, reality doesn't care about your feelings. These things Koonan claimed are false:

1. US temps haven't risen.
2. Sea level rise isn't accelerating.
3. Greenland ice loss isn't accelerating.
4. US Wildfires aren't getting worse.
5. Hurricanes aren't getting stronger.

Raging at me won't change the fact that those are falsehoods. Koonan cherrypicks in a dishonest fashion, as do all the deniers here. If you throw out most of the data because your political beliefs mandate you do that, you're going to get it wrong. That's why Koonan and the deniers get it wrong. I am much smarter on this topic than Koonan and all the deniers, because I don't throw away data. You can't gaslight intelligent and honest people.

You are free to try to back up any of Koonan's claims. To save time, I'll summarize how that discussion will go. You'll use the same dishonest cherrypicks Koonan did. I'll rip it apart with the actual data. You'll then claim that all of the actual data is a socialist plot, reminding everyone why they shouldn't take you seriously on any topic.

Then you'll be able to show us where climate scientists made those claims. Show us where climate scientists said "There will be more tornados" or "global crop yields will decline". If you're not lying, that should be easy for you.

We all know what actually happened. You saw some random person making the claim, and now you're pretending it was a claim from climate scientists. Just admit it. It's not like it isn't obvious.

Any other appeal-to-bad-authority fallacies you'd like to try?

 

That certainly describes anti-CO2 scaremongers.

The reality is indisputable: those who claim there is any sort of global climate crisis or emergency are just flat-out lying, and are thus probably lying about other things, too.

You are makin' $#!+ up again. Koonin didn't claim US temps haven't risen. He identified the fact that they haven't risen since the 1930s. He never claimed they haven't risen since the Little Ice Age. That was simply a fabrication on your part. You do that a lot.

That is not false. It is a fact, and Koonin provided the data that prove it.

Also a fact that Koonin provided data to demonstrate.

Again, you made that up. Koonin didn't say they haven't got worse since the 1970s. He identified the fact that they are much less severe than in the 1930s.

Clear?

Again, Koonin provided the data that show they aren't.

See above. Some of those are falsehoods because you made them up and falsely attributed them to Koonin. The rest are true.

As they say in Japan, "It's mirror time!" Cherry picking is the stock-in-trade of anti-CO2 hysteria mongers.

It wasn't Koonin who threw out most of the data because it showed significant global warming in the MWP and cooling in the LIA. It was your hero Michael Mann.

Yeah, you just change it....

You can't gaslight intelligent and honest people.

He already did.

Much as it has gone thus far, presumably.

You have already tried to do that and failed spectacularly.

Like most of your other claims, that didn't happen.

You said Koonin's false claim was that those predictions had been made, not that "climate scientists" (whatever they are) had made them. You are now disingenuously moving the goal posts. Classic gaslighting trick.

Show us where Koonin said climate scientists had made those claims. If you're not lying, it should be easy for you.

No, what actually happened was that I said I remembered the claims being made, and you falsely and disingenuously pretended I had said I remembered climate scientists making them. Just admit it. It's not like it isn't obvious.

Any other gaslighting tricks you'd like to try?

 

So like I said, he lied.

https://www.globalchange.gov/browse/indicators/us-surface-temperatures



This is the part where you tell us the data is a socialist conspiracy.

By cherrypicking. That's another way of saying "lying". and that's the point, the Koonin tends to lie that way..

So now your defense is "But ... but ... Koonin only said some vague unnamed person said that, so he was right!".

Which means you're admitting that Koonin was attacking a strawman.

And you're also admitting that climate scientists didn't say any of that. Though obviously, whenever it's convenient for you, you'll flipflop and claim the opposite.

 

No, those who retroactively alter temperature data to agree with CO2 hysteria theory are the ones who have lied.

I don't think there is anything socialist about it. But retroactive alteration of temperature data to agree with the proved-false CO2 theory of global surface temperature regulation has been proved many times.

False on all counts.

No, it means I proved you were.

That is just another fabrication on your part. I haven't taken a position on what "climate scientists" say because I don't think it's a very meaningful term. Certainly hysterical anti-CO2 scaremongers can't honestly be called climate scientists.

I'm just pointing out your falsehoods and strawman fallacies.

 

The Ministry of Truth is well established in Germany.
Euro Courts Infringing On Freedom Of Science…Climate Science Being Decided By Courts Instead Of By Proof
By P Gosselin on 19. June 2021

Share this...
An outstanding essay…

An extremely dangerous political development is in full swing in Europe: Legal courts are now taking it upon themselves to decide the questions of science.
================================================

Europe‘s climate courts infringing on the freedom of science
While constantly claiming they are “following the science”, climate change partisans are in reality suppressing it.

By Fred F. Mueller

This has been blatantly demonstrated in a decision of the Karlsruhe-based Federal Constitutional Court of Germany on March 24, 2021. For many years, “Climate change Chancellor” Angela Merkel had the opportunity to staff this court with her devoted followers. The recent ruling on the Climate Protection Act of Germany’s government will certainly set a mark in history. Although the word “climate” is nowhere to be found in the current version of the German Basic Law (= Germany’s Constitution), “climate protection” and, moreover, even the “establishment of climate neutrality” have now been virtually elevated to constitutional articles. In the view of Germany’s highest court, compliance with the “2-degree target” and, if possible, even the “1.5 -degree target” of the Paris Climate Agreement even justifies considerable state interference with the civil liberties enshrined in the Basic Law.

The first right of freedom now to be marginalized is the freedom of research and teaching, as is documented in the written opinion of court President Stephan Harbarth and his seven fellow judges in the first chamber: The Federal Constitutional Court considers itself authorized to decide on scientific questions by judgement instead of by scientific proof, as is usually the case. This might be regarded as a kind of reversion to the Middle Ages, when people who relied on their own intellect were considered as a thorn in the side of the religious and political rulers of that era. Such independent spirits dared to put into doubt everything that was put before the people by princes and priests. . . .

 

The Ministry of Truth has indeed become supranational.

Bloomberg Celebrates an International Banker Effort to Dictate Climate Policy
Eric Worrall
Climate policy is rapidly becoming a test bed, for how much control international bankers can exert over the policy decisions of elected governments, through boycotting the purchase of government bonds.

 

The P Gosselin who is the owner and writer of the blog “no tricks zone?
Makes this speculation at best at worst whacked out conspiracy theory

 

As is clearly stated, the author is Fred F. Mueller.

 

...says the intellectual heir of the officials who ruled Galileo was wrong on a question of objective empirical fact, and even refused to witness his demonstration of it....

 

He is too far gone, his prejudice virus vaccine doesn't work for people who are deliberately ignoring the erosion of their free speech tights.

This has happened through history and will happen again because of people like him not defending free speech.

 

Meanwhile you didn't address any of the article because you have no idea what is there BECAUSE you don't read any of it.

You sink lower and lower as you make these stupid attacks on people while having no idea what is in the post, your prejudice is complete, why are you bothering to comment at all?

You don't even care about the possibility that FREE SPEECH rights are being eroded right in front of you.

Wow!

 

People laughing at the transparent fraud that your cult pushes is not "eroding your free speech rights."

Get used to it, because that won't change. You won't get to peddle your fraud unchallenged, no matter how many tears you shed.

 

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
― George Orwell

 

You made that up. No one here objected to laughing. You simply made it up. You do that a lot.

No part of which you have been able to demonstrate is fraudulent....

The cult in question is clearly the CO2-doom cult, not the common-sensical "no evidence there is anything to worry about" side of the controversy.

Too bad you can't address the actual issue: forcible censorship of scientific dissent.

Yes it will. Your doom cult is going to continue being proved disastrously wrong as a matter of objective physical fact, and you will not be able to get away with your gaslighting much longer. Get used to it.

You won't get to peddle your fraud unchallenged, no matter how many tears you shed.