Tag Archives | Denial

More About Breitbarts Climate Disinformation Efforts (ie. Lies)

By on September 20, 2011 in Global Warming Denial

The other day I spotted a global warming denial propaganda piece from  that paragon exemplar of quality journalism Breitbart’s BigGovernment.com  and wrote about it here. While there is a half-hearted tepid admission that the article » Nature Journal of Science Discredits Man-made Global Warming – Big Government contained a “minor citation error” (I laughed out loud when I read that!) from the editors but the damage is done. As Mark Twin famously said, “A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.” The article has already been copied and pasted into countless global warming denial blogs and forums around the net without any kind of correction and the article author hasn’t made any kind of retraction or correction to the article on his blog either. The lie is still traveling around just like they (Breitbart and Street) want it to. Apparently the tiny admission that they blew it at Big Goverment came about as a result of being exosed for the lying propagandists they are by:

Revkin makes a great point that I think speaks to the damage this kind of propaganda causes:

“It’s no wonder that, despite occasional shifts in polls and deeply polarized small factions at the edges of climate discourse (nourished by this kind of material), the public largely remains disengaged on the issue.”

Despite being caught I am pretty sure Breitbart and Street are feeling pretty good about themselves.

Comments { 0 }

Another Nobel Prize-winning physicist protests global warming alarmism | NJ.com

By on September 16, 2011 in Global Warming Denial

A blogger over at the Star Ledger/NJ.com, tells us about the important news that Another Nobel Prize-winning physicist protests global warming alarmism | NJ.com.

It is certainly very significant and well worth noting that in the last two years that .004% (lets not forget Dr. Harold Lewis who I mentioned in a post here the other day) of its approximately 48,000 members have resigned from the organization over it’s publicity stated position regarding global warming. Four one thousandths of a percent! Support for anthropogenic global warming amongst physicists is just crumbling all around us as we speak.

Mr. Mulshine see this as just more evidence that the support for the consensus opinon that global warming is antropogenic in origin is nothing but idological religious devotion.

Religion is faith and belief in a doctrine or cause in lieu of any real  evidence. There are multiple lines of evidence regarding global warming and its anthropogenic origins so I would argue that if you polled the 47,998 physicists who remain members of the APS they would describe global warming denial as a religion and a dangerous one at that. I would add that it is a politically motivated religion as well.

 

Comments { 0 }

Fox News Hypes the Resignation of a Nobel Prize-Winning Physicist Over Global Warming

By on September 14, 2011 in Global Warming & Climate Change, Global Warming Denial

Fox News hypes the resignation of one single (albeit a one time Nobel Prize winning) physicist from the American Physical Society (APS) because he disagreed with one single phrase in the official statement from the society regarding climate change.

Nobel Prize-Winning Physicist Resigns Over Global Warming | Fox News.

This is much ado about nothing.

But Fox and now the denial blogosphere will make a big deal of this as part of their partisan effort to try and sow public doubt about global warming theory pushing the denial meme that climate scientists are still debating the science. (Hint, no they aren’t, the science is settled)

Interestingly Fox while emphasizing that the scientist, Dr. Ivar Giaever, was a Nobel Prize winner makes no mention that Drs. Leo Esaki and Brian D. Josephson, who won the Nobel Prize with him are part of the 100 Nobel Laureates Warn Our Planet! effort as signatories behind this statement:

The most profound danger to world peace in the coming years will stem not from the irrational acts of states or individuals but from the legitimate demands of the world’s dispossessed. Of these poor and disenfranchised, the majority live a marginal existence in equatorial climates. Global warming, not of their making but originating with the wealthy few, will affect their fragile ecologies most. Their situation will be desperate and manifestly unjust.

It cannot be expected, therefore, that in all cases they will be content to await the beneficence of the rich. If then we permit the devastating power of modern weaponry to spread through this combustible human landscape, we invite a conflagration that can engulf both rich and poor. The only hope for the future lies in co-operative international action, legitimized by democracy.

It is time to turn our backs on the unilateral search for security, in which we seek to shelter behind walls. Instead, we must persist in the quest for united action to counter both global warming and a weaponized world.

These twin goals will constitute vital components of stability as we move toward the wider degree of social justice that alone gives hope of peace.

Some of the needed legal instruments are already at hand, such as the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, the Convention on Climate Change, the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaties and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. As concerned citizens, we urge all governments to commit to these goals that constitute steps on the way to replacement of war by law.

To survive in the world we have transformed, we must learn to think in a new way. As never before, the future of each depends on the good of all.

Months ago you might recall (actually probably not because it was pretty insignificant too) that the denial blogosphere was all abuzz with the news that the Dr. Harold Lewis had resigned from APS over pretty much the same thing, a general disagreement over the official APS position regarding global warming and APS chose to issue a statement on Lewis’s comments as he resigned (APS Comments on Harold Lewis’ Resignation of his Society Membership). Dr. Lewis apparently thought that the Climategate non scandal was a big deal and threw a hissy fit over the APS’s non attention to the matter.

The whole event was seen by the climate science community as much ado about nothing at the time and I will expect the response amongst the professionals that matter will be the same this time too. As for the APS we will just have to wait and see if they have anything to say about Dr. Giaever’s resignation.

Comments { 0 }

Are cosmic rays causing global warming? – YouTube

By on September 9, 2011 in Global Warming & Climate Change, Global Warming Denial

Are cosmic rays causing global warming? – YouTube. Potholer54 (further and quite thoroughly) debunks the global warming denial scuttlebut (i.e lies & B.S.) that the paper Role of sulphuric acid, ammonia and galactic cosmic rays in atmorpheric aerosol nucleation” — J. Kirkby et al. Nature, August 2011 can be described as “a definitive study on Global Warming that proves the dominant controller of temperatures in the Earth’s atmosphere is due to galactic cosmic rays and the sun, rather than by man.” Nothing could be further from the truth, see Pure Fabrication, Lies and Global Warming Denial Propaganda from Non-other Than Andrew Breitbart’s Big Government for one example of it I found. Meanwhile here’s Potholer54’s take…

Comments { 0 }

Pure Fabrication, Lies and Global Warming Denial Propaganda from Non-other Than Andrew Breitbart's Big Government

By on September 6, 2011 in Global Warming Denial

I just got done writing this in an online discussion forum debate last night about the CERN Cloud paper:

The lead author of the paper Role of sulphuric acid, ammonia and galactic cosmic rays in atmospheric aerosol nucleation Jasper Kirby was on Nature in a podcast (listen to it at 21:44) and said unequivocally the effects he observed in his research would only occur in the uppermost atmosphere where clouds actually don’t even form and “you cannot use my research to make any definitive statement on the effect of cosmic rays on climate.”

I will repeat what he said “you cannot use my research to make any definitive statement on the effect of cosmic rays on climate.“

Again one more time,… the lead author of the paper said “you cannot use my research to make any definitive statement on the effect of cosmic rays on climate.“

(thanks to Scott Mandia’s CERN Cloud Paper: Cirrus-ly Being Spun « Global Warming: Man or Myth?,  ConCERN Trolling on Cosmic Rays, Clouds, and Climate Change | The Way Things Break  & ConCERN Trolling on Cosmic Rays, Clouds, and Climate Change for enlightening me on the subject)

And then I spot this evening this unbelievable piece of propaganda and distortion on Breitbart’s Big Government website:

Nature Journal of Science Discredits Man-made Global Warming

by Chriss W. Street

Nature Journal of Science, ranked as the world’s most cited scientific periodical, has just published the definitive study on Global Warming that proves the dominant controller of temperatures in the Earth’s atmosphere is due to galactic cosmic rays and the sun, rather than by man. One of the report’s authors, Professor Jyrki Kauppinen, summed up his conclusions regarding the potential for man-made Global Warming: “I think it is such a blatant falsification.”

[…]

What is interesting is I’m looking at the list of co-authors on the paper on the Nature website and I can’t seem to even find this ‘Professor Jyrki Kauppinen’ that Chriss W. Street is quoting. Here’s the list:

Jasper Kirkby, Joachim Curtius, João Almeida, Eimear Dunne, Jonathan Duplissy, Sebastian Ehrhart, Alessandro Franchin, Stéphanie Gagné, Luisa Ickes, Andreas Kürten, Agnieszka Kupc, Axel Metzger, Francesco Riccobono, Linda Rondo, Siegfried Schobesberger, Georgios Tsagkogeorgas, Daniela Wimmer, Antonio Amorim, Federico Bianchi, Martin Breitenlechner, André David, Josef Dommen, Andrew Downard, Mikael Ehn, Richard C. Flagan, Stefan Haider, Armin Hansel, Daniel Hauser, Werner Jud, Heikki Junninen, Fabian Kreissl, Alexander Kvashin, Ari Laaksonen, Katrianne Lehtipalo, Jorge Lima, Edward R. Lovejoy, Vladimir Makhmutov, Serge Mathot, Jyri Mikkilä, Pierre Minginette, Sandra Mogo, Tuomo Nieminen, Antti Onnela, Paulo Pereira, Tuukka Petäjä, Ralf Schnitzhofer, John H. Seinfeld, Mikko Sipilä, Yuri Stozhkov, Frank Stratmann, Antonio Tomé, Joonas Vanhanen, Yrjo Viisanen, Aron Vrtala, Paul E. Wagner, Hansueli Walther, Ernest Weingartner, Heike Wex, Paul M. Winkler, Kenneth S. Carslaw, Douglas R. Worsnop, Urs Baltensperger & Markku Kulmala

In fact searching the Journal Nature for ‘Jyrki Kauppinen’ I get “Sorry, no results were found. Please search again.”

So searching some more via Google this time to see if I can find where the quote from ‘Professor Jyrki Kauppinen’ saying “I think it is such a blatant falsification” comes from I find an an article on the denial aggregator web site Climate Realists dated Wed April 14th 2010 which has a Finish newspaper article about a study led by Kauppinen in which he claims to have found (according to the translation) “increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide to explain only 5-10 percent of observed global warming” and that “Kauppinen intends to publish the research findings to Nature , the June issue of Science magazine“.

So unless I just fell off a turnip truck it looks to me like the Breitbart employed author Chriss W. Street has written a deceitful little piece that says:

  • “Nature Journal of Science, ranked as the world’s most cited scientific periodical, has just published the definitive study on Global Warming that proves the dominant controller of temperatures in the Earth’s atmosphere is due to galactic cosmic rays and the sun, rather than by man.” —That’s a lie, Lie #1, it doesn’t say that at all. Again the lead author on the paper has said unequivocally the effects he observed in his research would only occur in the uppermost atmosphere where clouds actually don’t even form and “you cannot use my research to make any definitive statement on the effect of cosmic rays on climate.“
  • “…One of the report’s authors, Professor Jyrki Kauppinen,…” — That a lie too, Lie #2, Kauppinen wasn’t one of the paper authors at all. He didn’t work on it.
  •  “…summed up his conclusions regarding the potential for man-made Global Warming: “I think it is such a blatant falsification.” — Lie #3, Wanting Brietbart’s readers to believe Kauppinen was talking about the paper that he claims Kauppinen worked on Street pulled a newspaper quote Kauppinen made commenting about a paper he wrote 15 months before the Role of sulphuric acid, ammonia and galactic cosmic rays in atmospheric aerosol nucleation paper was ever even published.

It amazing to me that someone can write a whopping lie like that. But then again I realize it a Breitbart publication. Maybe Chriss W. Street is a relative of James O’Keefe another infamous Breitbart liar.

The lies, deceit, and manipulation of the truth in the article don’t stop there though. It leaves the topic it supposed to be about (the CERN Cloud paper) and then just goes on to recite all the latest global warming denial propaganda talking points.

Really the whole piece is quite a spectacular lie. Right out of the Joseph Goebbels playbook.

Comments { 14 }

The dumbest quote ever from a climate change denier.

By on August 30, 2011 in Global Warming & Climate Change, Global Warming Denial, Science Denial

Is this a misquote or is this climate change denier setting a new record for stupidity? The emphsis in the article I’m quoting from is mine:

Professor writes book challenging man-made global warming beliefs

By R. Nicole Blanton

Published on: Tuesday, August 30, 2011 Modified on: Tuesday, August 30, 2011

A UH professor aims to refute claims that the Earth is in a permanent warming period in his new book.

Larry Bell, an endowed professor of space architecture, said he blames misrepresented statistics and misleading politicians for the widespread belief in global warming in his book, “Climate of Corruption: Politics and Power Behind The Global Warming Hoax.”

“The notion of carbon dioxide being a pollutant is silly because carbon dioxide is what makes plants grow; it’s what whales breathe,” Bell said.

“There’s a lot of shenanigans with words.”

via Professor writes book challenging man-made global warming beliefs // thedailycougar.com.

Right off the bat the “Carbon Dioxide is Plant Food” argument isn’t at all creditable and has been thoroughly debunked (see Skeptical Science: CO2 is Plant Food for starters and here debunking / Good for Plant Growth Myth for even more debunking links) but what really blew me away was the second part,…”it’s what whales breathe.” I am thinking that has to be a misquote because no college professor, in any subject, worth his salt could think that a mammal (whales are mammals you know) much less a fish breathes CO2. Animals breathe oxygen and exhale CO2. Plants take in CO2 (they don’t really breathe per se) and give off (exhale) Oxygen in a process we all know (except for Larry Bell that is) as photosynthesis).

There is more denial stupidity and ignorance in the article about his jokers book but I’ll have to get back to it some other time. Thanks to Tropical Storm Irene I’m working from a lap top as I sit on a sidewalk downtown where they have power and a few wifi hotspots.

But I have to ask did that guy really say CO2 is what whales breathe? How did he ever et beyond 10th grade biology?

Comments { 3 }

Well that does it for me, I am definitely NOT voting for Rick Perry

By on August 30, 2011 in Politics

This just in:

Anti-global warming Sen. Inhofe formally endorses Perry

By NBC’s Carrie Dann

TULSA, Okla. — Sen. Jim Inhofe, a strident conservative voice in the Senate and a vocal skeptic of global warming, formally endorsed Gov. Rick Perry on Monday, calling him “the only guy who can really win this thing.”

“The one thing that he has that nobody else has is this background of experience, not just him being an administrator but doing the right thing, cutting down the deficit, increasing jobs. And he’s done everything right,” Inhofe said, adding, “No one out there running is as aware as to the cost of all the overregulation that we’re experiencing right now.”

Nah, seriously I was never going to vote for him anyway. As I’ve already said here before both directly and indirectly I think Rick Perry is arguably the worst candidate for President of the United States I have seen in my lifetime. I think his  getting the endorsement from Inhofe, the lead climate change denier in congress, falls under the “why am I not surprised” category.

Comments { 0 }

President and Crazy are not two words we want connected

By on August 22, 2011 in Global Warming & Climate Change, Global Warming Denial

Ron Reagan (Jr.) in the Hardball Let Me Finish segment, Monday, August 22, 2011, gives a stinging commentary on "Crazy Presidential Candidates".

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

"Let me finish tonight with science and the Republican Party. Two out of the three presidential candidates generally considered frontrunners for the Republican Party nomination believe the moon is made of green cheese. Does that cause you concern?

You’d think it would. After all, astronauts have been to the moon and have brought back rocks that seem utterly cheese-free. And no giant space mice have been observed nibbling at lunar craters.

Ah, but Rick Perry and Michelle Bachman – the frontrunners in question – don’t believe NASA ever landed men on the moon. As for space mice, the Governor and Congresswoman think they may just be lurking out of sight on the moon’s dark side.

I’m kidding, of course. As far as I know, neither Perry nor Bachman really harbor any such thoughts about our planet’s satellite. If they did, they’d be laughed right out of any presidential contest. Wouldn’t they? I mean… the moon made of green cheese? NASA landings faked? That’s way too crazy for the White House, right? That’s out there where the buses don’t stop. Yeah…

Trouble is, both Bachman and Perry profess other beliefs just as crazy. For instance, neither seems to accept Charles Darwin’s idea that species – including the human species – evolve over time. Instead, they pretend there’s a scientific controversy involving evolution where none exists.

Both also reject the consensus of over 90% of climate scientists worldwide that human activity is warming our planet to dangerously disruptive levels. One of Rick Perry’s first pronouncements upon entering the presidential contest was to declare any such scientific consensus a hoax. Bachman seems to agree.

That would be a massive global charade involving not just the world’s scientists but the governments of virtually every nation as well. If they wanted to be taken the least bit seriously, anyone making such an extraordinary claim would have to back it up with extraordinarily compelling evidence. Wouldn’t they?

Perry and Bachman offer no such evidence. Not a shred. Any rational person would consider such wild, unsupported claims an embarrassment and the folks who made them unfit for high office. Yet here they are, Perry and Bachman, frontrunners for the Republican presidential nomination.

That ought to tell us something – and it’s not something good – about the current Republican Party. And if either of these two were to actually move into the White House, it would say something even more tragic about our body politic. President and crazy are not two words we want connected."

"President and Crazy are not two words we want connected." What an important line!

Comments { 0 }

Al Gore finally calls out the climate deniers for all their lies deception and bullshit,…

By on August 9, 2011 in Global Warming & Climate Change

Al Gore finally calls out the climate deniers for all their lies deception and bullshit and the politically motivated and driven deniers can’t stop whining and crying about it. Audio of Vice President Al Gore speaking at the Aspen Institute, explains how corporate interests have manipulated scientific institutions and the news media to defend everything from cigarettes to global warming pollution.

Within hours of the audio of this talk hitting the internet the climate change denial blogosphere was all a flutter with their typical ad hominems. This from the serial liar and propagandist Marc Morano leading the charge…

Gore Unhinged! Loses it on skeptical claims: ‘It may be volcanoes.’ Bullshit! ‘It may be sun spots.’ Bullshit! ‘It’s not getting warmer.’ Bullshit!’ — Climate Depot Responds!

"Climate Depot Responds! " Geez, what sanctimonious sycophantic bull shit. I can’t imagine there being even a speck of scientific bona fides anywhere in his résumé.

For more on Marc Morano:

In so many respects Marc Morano (once upon a time a producer for Rush Limbaugh) is the prototypical climate change denial propagandist bullshiter that Vice President Al Gore is railing about. All of a sudden one day years ago I stated getting these poorly composed poorly designed emails from him when he was Senator Jim Inhofe’s Communications Director for the United States Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works, essentially Inhofe’s point man in the distribution of climate change denial nonsense. I figured he had scoured the WordPress.com blogging community (where this blog first started out) for blogs on climate change and global warming so he could spam them in the hope that some of the ones that he would hit on there would spread his disinformation around.

For those that want to really understand just what Vice President Al Gore is so ticked off about let me recommend:

Comments { 0 }

Matt Patterson & The New York Post Clueless About The Climate

By on August 3, 2011 in Global Climate Disruption, Global Warming & Climate Change, Global Warming Denial

Warming Not: Climate-change theory faces sudden collapseI was glancing through my mom’s edition of the NY Post today and I saw an op-ed by a fellow named Matt Patterson entitled “Warming Not: Climate-change theory faces sudden collapse” and then when I took a look at a google new feed I keep on “global warming” I saw that the top story there a Fox Nation Report Global Warming Theory Faces Sudden Collapse which was just a re-titled version of the same NYPost op-ed.

I thought,…you’re kidding me right?

Wadda bunch of hooey.

Before I take this op-ed apart for what it is or should I really say it isn’t a little bit about Matt Patterson. A quick check around the net tells me he’s a political writer (aka propagandist) for a number of right wing web sites in the Brietbart network as well as writing for the more respectable but still hard right American Thinker. Now for my ad hominem,… the guys a manipulative lying jerk (well maybe that isn’t an ad hominem since I going to establish why he’s a manipulative liar).

If you breakdown Patterson’s piece he’s basically saying Climate Change Theory is on the ropes facing collapse because of two recent developments (somehow he manages to completely ignore the recent news that global warming denier challenges to the paleoclimate temperature record, the hockey stick, took a near fatal body blow this past spring when the great white hope Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project gave a preliminary report before congress that reported that the temperature record is accurate. See the L. A. Times article for a peek at what that is all about:

Critics’ review unexpectedly supports scientific consensus on global warming

A UC Berkeley team’s preliminary findings in a review of temperature data confirm global warming studies.

The two points that Patterson says (that he thinks) are going to overturn everything are:

  1. The work of Charles Monnett who lead the polar bear research project that Al Gore cited in "An Inconvenient Truth" which said the polar bear drownings could be on the increase thanks to polar ice melting in the Arctic has been called into question and…

  2. Recent work by Drs. Roy Spencer and Danny Braswell has found that the greenhouse effect has been vastly overestimated by climate scientists.

To the first point with a quick check around the net I find that there is no scientific challenge to Charles Monnett’s Polar Bear Research and that the controversy is all about him being suspended for problems in how he manages the project financially. AP reports that Scientist suspension is about project’s management. This is essentially a red herring, a type of straw man argument that Patterson is creating out of some real questionable financial management moves that Dr. Charles Monnett has made. While we don’t know yet what the investigation will bring, Dr. Charles Monnett may very well be a crook or he may be just an incompetent manager or he may be innocent of all charges but nothing I can find anywhere indicates that the scientific data and analysis he produced is in question. For all we know right now there is no connection between his problematic management and the science than there would be if we found out he had hundreds of dollars of unpaid parking tickets. The US Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Enforcement and Regulation even issued a statement saying Dr. Monnett was being investigated for administrative matters, involving “collateral duties involving contracts.” Indeed there might even be some questions as to whether Dr. Monnett has been setup and the investigation is all part of an effort to speed up the issuing of Arctic drilling permits (Something Does Not Add Up).

On the second point Patterson is again being very deceptive. One single paper (unless it is startlingly spectacular is not going to take down the current thinking and opinion of the worlds climate scientists in one fell swoop and given the criticism this particular paper is getting from the scientific community (not the denial press and blogosphere mind you) it doesn’t look like this paper is that important at all.

Patterson makes the point that the paper was accepted and published in a peer reviewed journal but the journal Remote Sensing is a geographers journal not one dedicated to atmospheric and climate science and there are also complaints about the statistical integrity of the paper since there is little or no discussion of the uncertainties involved (in other words no consideration of the likelihood of results really being real) nor were the methods used in the paper discussed to the point where they could be replicated and tested by others. And according to Andrew Dessler, a professor of atmospheric sciences at Texas A&M University "He’s taken an incorrect model, he’s tweaked it to match observations, but the conclusions you get from that are not correct."

Cutting to the chase the overwhelming majority of the scientists in the climate science community are very critical to completely dismissive of the paper. In fact Stephanie Pappas, in her article for LiveScience, Climate Change Debunked? Not So Fast, on the Spencer Braswell paper wrote that "no climate scientist contacted by LiveScience agreed". The paper was for the most part ignored until James Taylor a lawyer (not a climate scientist) who writes political climate change disinformation on behalf of the Heartland Institute (a libertarian, public policy think tank that argue that global warming is not occurring and, further, that warming would be beneficial if it did occur) wrote an op-ed piece for Forbes. Patterson (a James-Taylor-Hearltand-like wannabe who I have written about before here years ago) picked up on it and echoed it.

There is no new science here in either bit whatsoever but the Taylor’s and Patterson’s who have politicized the science write the crap they do to try and manipulate and shape public opinion, not to educate it.

Patterson’s implication that this is an earth shaking paper is nothing but his own attempt creative propaganda writing.

Articles of interest worth reading on Dr. Monnett’s problems…

Articles of interest worth reading regarding the new Spencer and Braswell paper.

Comments on some of the other disinformation Matt Patterson generates can be found here: Matt Patterson | Media Matters for America

Comments { 6 }
FireStats icon Powered by FireStats
Plugin from the creators ofBrindes Personalizados :: More at PlulzWordpress Plugins