The Attempt to Establish a Climate Ministry of Truth

Sorry, but that was too incoherent for me to interpret.

 

Okay but I was attempting not to trigger the typical asthmatic response followed by hypertension and hyperbole seen whenever Al Gore or Greta are mentioned

 

I certainly don't care about Al Gore, and my primary sentiment about Greta is the sympathy I feel for all exploited children.

 

The Party demands loyalty.
UK Met Office Fails to Retract False Claim of “More Intense” Storms Due to Climate Change
Guest Blogger
Perhaps the Met Office doesn’t want to apologise for misleading the public over winter storms – it might put down an unwelcome marker for mea culpas becoming general across the entire media…

The Met Office is refusing to retract a claim made by a senior meteorologist on BBC Radio 5 Live that storms in the U.K. are becoming “more intense” due to climate change. This is despite admitting in Freedom of Information (FOI) documents that it had no evidence to back up the claim. The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) noted the “false” claim seriously misled the public and demanded a retraction. The Daily Sceptic covered the story last Thursday and has since contacted the Met Office on three occasions seeking a response. “False information of this kind does much to induce climate anxiety in the population and I am sure you would agree such errors should be corrected by any reputable organisation,” it was noted. No reply was received – no retraction has been forthcoming.

The storm claim was made by Met Office spokesman Clare Nasir on January 22nd and led to an FOI request for an explanation by the investigative journalist Paul Homewood. The Met Office replied that it was unable to answer the request due to the fact that the information “is not held”. Interestingly, the Met Office’s own 2022 climate report noted that the last two decades have seen fewer occurrences of maximum wind speeds in the 40, 50, 60 knot bands than previous decades. The Daily Sceptic report went viral on social media with almost 3,000 retweets on X, while GWPF’s demand for retraction was covered by the Scottish Daily Express.

The lack of action by the state-funded Met Office is very interesting. Extreme weather is now the major go-to explanation for the opinion that humans largely control the climate, despite a general lack of scientific evidence. Backing away from this ‘settled’ narrative risks damaging a potent tool nudging populations across the world towards the collectivist Net Zero political project. Mainstream media usually take care to fudge their reporting of any direct link, using phrases such as ‘scientists say’ and sprinkling words ‘could’ and ‘might’ in the copy. The mistake Nasir made was to forget this basic requirement of broadcast fearmongering. . . .

 

It's not Democrats trying to restrict the freedom to travel between states.

 

Oh, you're a Game Master. I'll watch my step.

 

Not to worry -- that's not within the realm of the possible.

 

And...? So does a toaster. How does that injure anyone?

It is obviously quite difficult -- for you, that is.

 

No it isn't. Energy consumption is not "harm." It just indicates a higher standard of living.

Do you really need this explained to you?

 

No, you are just makin' $#!+ up again. As usual.

Is that how you choose to rationalize massively harmful government policies based on absurd and dishonest nonscience? That poor young Greta must not be made to feel uncomfortable about the ignorance, conceit, and foolishness that somehow gained her international renown?

 

Red states are doing it now, preparing for it now.

The conservative movement wants a government small enough to drown in a bathtub and big enough to control what you do, think, say, or read, how you act, whom you love, sleep with or marry, and when and whether or not you have children. You know, freedom.

 

Will not pass Constitutional muster. Spare me the polemics.
The Right To Travel And Privacy: Intersecting Fundamental ...

University of Illinois Chicago
https://repository.law.uic.edu › jitpl › vol30 › iss4


by R Sobel · 2014 — The U.S. Constitution and Supreme Court recognize and protect the right to interstate travel. The travel right entails privacy and free domestic movement ...

 

Totally wrote - seek out whoever taught you that and tell them they confused conservatives for lefties.

 

Hollywood is committing suicide.
Hollywood Climate Summit Pushes More Woke Film Scripts
Eric Worrall
If your viewer interest is cratering, the solution is to double down on your mistake? . . . .

 

Get woke, go broke. I like it!

 

Alarmists are not constrained by the data or accuracy.
Facebook Censorship due to a Science Feedback “Fact Check”

By Andy May

Facebook’s censorship is totally out of hand, and their “independent and nonpartisan fact checks” are anything but. Now they are censoring “Climate: The Movie.” The supposed “fact checks” provided by Science Feedback and Climate Feedback (they are two branches of the same organization) have been shown many times to be both partisan and ideologically driven. The “fact check” of Steve Koonin’s bestselling book Unsettled done by Climate Feedback was blisteringly criticized by the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) in a lead editorial by the WSJ editorial staff.

The editorial includes the following:

“Mr. Koonin, whose careful book draws extensively on existing scholarship, may respond on the merits in a different forum. Suffice it to say here that many of the ‘fact check’ claims relied on by Facebook don’t contradict the underlying material, but instead argue with its perceived implications.

The fact-check attacks Mr. Koonin’s book for saying the “net economic impact of human-induced climate change will be minimal through at least the end of this century.” Minimal is in the eyes of the beholder, but the U.S. National Climate Assessment predicted America’s climate costs in 2090 at about $500 billion per year—a fraction of the recent Covid stimulus in an economy that could be four times as large.

The fact-check on the statement that ‘global crop yields are rising, not falling’ retorts that ‘while global crop yields are rising, this does not constitute evidence that climate change is not adversely affecting agriculture.’ OK, but that’s an argument, not a fact-check. …

Climate Feedback’s comment on a line from the review about ‘the number and severity of droughts’ does not identify any falsehood, but instead claims, “it doesn’t really make sense to make blanket statements regarding overall global drought trends.’ Maybe it doesn’t make sense for Facebook to restrict the reach of legitimate scientific argument and competing interpretations of data.”

WSJ, May 7, 2021.
Steve Koonin’s rebuttals of the Climate Feedback post are here and here. I’ve also written about the erroneous Climate Feedback post here.

In other words, fact checks should check facts, not a difference of opinion between two scientists. “Fact checks” today are too often thinly disguised and very biased editorials, often confusing very left-wing interpretations of ambiguous data with facts. Then these supposedly “independent and nonpartisan fact checks” are used by Facebook, and sometimes by Linkedin, as excuses to censor legitimate and well-documented posts and movies. Documentation and references of the facts and interpretations presented in Climate: The Movie can be found here.

Further reading on the blatant bias and misinformation found the Science Feedback and Climate Feedback websites: . . .

 

I have seen similar incompetence and dishonesty in all putative "fact checks" attacking climate realists. Every single one.

 

The build-out of the MoT continues.
Ever More Audacious Efforts To Suppress Mainstream Conservative Speech
April 18, 2024/ Francis Menton

• 
  You are undoubtedly familiar with many efforts of the fascist left to use its control of government offices, bureaucracies, and other institutions to delegitimize and silence mainstream conservative speech:
  
  
• things like the Censorship Industrial Complex, otherwise known as pressure by government functionaries to induce social media platforms to shut down wrongthink on topics ranging from Covid to climate change to Trump; de-monetization of perfectly reasonable sites like PJ Media or Watts Up With That; the political prosecutions of presumptive Republican nominee Trump, including locking him in a courtroom to prevent him from campaigning; and many more such.
  
  
• This week along comes a new and quite extreme instance that you may have missed.
  

READ MORE