Zsolt Lengyel Goes Censorship (the outliers named)

By Robert Bradley Jr. -- May 9, 2025

“The phrase ‘non-alarmist’ suggests that climate science is exaggerated or hysterical, rather than rooted in rigorous research. You may also re-consider your brazen ‘comment flooding‘ strategy: I will block any of you adding your usual anti-science tirades & nonsense.” (- Zsolt Lengyel, February 14, 2025)

And he did just that, but not before I copied some things for the record. History matters, and the history of climate alarm is one of exaggeration and intolerance toward the loyal opposition.

Climate activist (zealot?) Zsolt Lengyel [profile now blocked to me] describes himself as:

Policy-focused climate action dinosaur – having worked on the World’s two pioneering Kyoto Protocol flexible mechanism JI/CDM programmes, the Prototype Carbon Fund of the World Bank and the Dutch Government’s Carboncredit.nl – ERUPT/CERUPT – but with a fresh mind assuming that the future is not what will happen, but what we will do.

Seasoned climate mitigation and energy transition expert with various Team Leader/Chief of Party and Key Expert experiences globally.

Former auditor and head of Climate Services of an UNFCCC accredited entity (DOE, AIE), the Swiss Association for Quality and Management Systems (SQS).

Co-founder and elected Chairman (2015-20) of the Institute for European Energy and Climate Policy (IEECP) [www.ieecp.eu] dedicated to scientifically sound and evidence-based policy making.

Founding Member of the first European climate & energy auditor cooperative, verico SCE (Societas Cooperativa Europaea) [www.verico.eu] & an assessor at true&fair.expert.

Recent Skirmish

Recently, Lengyel stated:

Pete Bonk & Rob Bradley & all of your comrades: with your anti-science views please get prepared to be called a ‘climate change denialist’, what you are in your hearth.

The term “climate denialism” should be always used instead of “skepticism,” “realism,” or “non-alarmism” because it accurately reflects the rejection of established scientific evidence and distinguishes it from legitimate scientific inquiry.

1. Skepticism is a Scientific Virtue – Denialism is Not
True scientific skepticism involves questioning evidence and refining theories based on facts. Climate science, like all robust fields, has gone through rigorous peer review and overwhelming consensus-building.

Climate denialism, by contrast, ignores or distorts scientific evidence despite overwhelming proof. It is not genuine skepticism but a strategic rejection of facts to avoid inconvenient conclusions.

2. “Realism” is a Misleading Label
Some of you who deny climate change label themselves as “climate realists”, implying they are grounded in facts while climate scientists are not.

However, climate realism should mean acknowledging the reality of human-driven climate change, not dismissing it. Using “realism” as a shield for denial is a deliberate misrepresentation.

3. “Non-Alarmism” Downplays the Crisis
The phrase “non-alarmist” suggests that climate science is exaggerated or hysterical, rather than rooted in rigorous research. You may also re-consider your brazen ‘comment flooding‘ strategy: I will block any of you adding your usual anti-science tirades & nonsense.

With the vast energy and time at your disposal, please dive into the attribution studies of past or future extreme weather events supercharged by climate change. Change your mind, build resilience & stop your attempts blocking climate action . Sooner than later it will be you, your family & friends who will be hit by the climate crisis.

Zsolt Lengyel’s “I’ve had enough” diatribe followed this complaint:

I have unleashed a 𝐜𝐥𝐢𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐞 𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐢𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐭 𝐭𝐬𝐮𝐧𝐚𝐦𝐢 with my post about Trump ordering to delete climate change related materials/information from US federal servers, as experienced by USDA (- > https://lnkd.in/ej4A8VNk) The somewhat coordinated ( triggered by Rob Bradley?) flow of misinformation/disinformation and ‘ opinions presented  as (scientific)  facts’ is a reason for grave concern (i.e. how an unscientific, selfish and scapegoat-seeking World-view can easily emerge).

However, it can be converted into a useful preparatory exercise to refute these ideas as and when facing them (I expect that right-wing populism globally will feed and amplify such approaches). So to save time, here comes a summary of the denialists’ arguments and the way how to (try to) refute them.

Final Comment

Cancel culture is the last refuge of the climate alarmists who cannot handle the critics asking the obvious hard questions. Cancelling the intellectual competition only increases the confirmation bias of the zealots, which dooms them to disappointment if not anger and emotional blight. And if they really have “climate anxiety”, isn’t it time for a rethink?

Zealot Zsolt’s parade of climate terribles– Katharine Hayhoe, Michael Mann , Joe Romm, Ph.D. , Diana Urge-Vorsatz , Robert Vautard , Oliver Geden , Bill Hare, Niklas Höhne, Zeke Hausfather–allows me to understand Lengyel’s problem and rest my case.

——————————