Ed. note: This repost (April 7, 2021) is presented as one of countless examples of climate exaggeration from the highest scientific quarters…. Exaggeration backfires.
“Our winters are getting sick, and we know the reason why. It’s global warming, it’s rising temperatures, and that’s the only logical explanation for what’s happening.”
– Amato Evan (Scripps Institution of Oceanography) before the American Geophysical Union (Fall 2018), quoted here.
False science based on climate models is part of the complicated story behind the Great Texas Electricity Blackout of February 2021. As I posited in “U.S. Winter Outlook: Cooler North, Warmer South” (NOAA’s prediction bust):
… Continue ReadingEnter climate models, the Department of Commerce’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and politics. And a very bad result for the South this winter. The lack of weatherization in Texas for traditional power plants, in particular, might well have been influenced by the climate narrative of warmer winters.
“… there are plenty of climate science deniers here to vehemently argue for the defendants’ case [in Mann v. Steyn]…. It is profoundly saddening when you realize that the platform I am writing this on would most probably not remove these people’s posts in the form they were written had somebody reported them.” – Gunnar Schade
Readers at MasterResource already know about Andrew Dessler, chair professor in Texas A&M’s Department of Atmospheric Sciences, who morphs from scientist (his job) to biased, emotional advocacy. Lawyer-like, Dessler makes the best case for alarm rather than honestly considering other views and weaknesses in his argument. His emotional outbursts at his critics and utter distain at the general population (“assholes“) who reject his uber-Climate Alarmism marginalizes him outside of the Church of Climate.…
Continue Reading“The hope for some semblance of sanity is that the judge in this case will overturn the jury’s verdict, based on the fact that it was in stark contrast to the evidence presented.”
As readers know, I recently posted a detailed discussion of the Mann v Steyn lawsuit, and asserted that ALL of our rights were being debated. The jury’s verdict was rendered yesterday — and it was disturbing.
I’m not an attorney, but the two fundamental issues appeared to be: 1) Does a person have the right to publicly express their opinion (right or wrong) about a national matter? and 2) Does a person have the right to publicly express an opinion that is based on reasonable scientific evidence, but differs from what is currently politically correct? Apparently no to both!…
Continue Reading