http://blogs.dailyprincetonian.com/2010/09/global-warming-exposed-as-bs-during.html
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Three Years Since The Apocalypse
- Arctic Report card Summer 2026
- Elon Pushing Pushing Geoengineering
- Earth, Wind And Fire
- On The Road Again
- Vandalism At The Reflecting Pool
- Fifty Years Ago Today
- Truth Or Consequences
- US Climate Trend Maps
- Declining Spring Snow Cover In Northern New Mexico
- You Can’t Fool Mother Nature
- Cattle And The Climate
- One Atomic Bomb Per Hour
- New Video : Analyzing Oil And Gas
- Is Antarctica Melting?
- High Speed Analysis And Visualization
- El Nino To The Rescue?
- Fake News Update
- Growth Of Antarctic Sea Ice
- 65 Years Of Progress!
- El Nino To The Rescue?
- Worst March Drought On Record
- ChartGL Process Control Demo
- The Biggest Money Laundering Scam
- Drought In The Headwaters Of Lake Powell
Recent Comments
- Bob G on Three Years Since The Apocalypse
- Bob G on Three Years Since The Apocalypse
- John Francis on Elon Pushing Pushing Geoengineering
- toorightmate on Three Years Since The Apocalypse
- Gordon Vigurs on Three Years Since The Apocalypse
- conrad ziefle on Three Years Since The Apocalypse
- Bob G on Three Years Since The Apocalypse
- John Francis on Elon Pushing Pushing Geoengineering
- conrad ziefle on Earth, Wind And Fire
- GW on Arctic Report card Summer 2026


But wait, there’s more, on an angle of the subject that is less widely known than it otherwise should be: In my American Thinker article last week, “Warmist Slander of Scientific Skeptics” ( http://www.americanthinker.com…tific.html ), I detail how the sources in the recent New Yorker magazine ‘exposé’ of the Koch brothers rely on other sources for their global warming ‘corrupt scientists’ accusation that trace right back to enviro-activists who created the corruption accusation 15+ years ago.
AGW believers have put all their eggs in one basket, that Fred Singer et. al were paid to “reposition global warming as theory rather than fact”, and as I boiled down in my ClimateRealists chronology article ( http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=6175 ), these guys created a narrative so simple it could be regurgitated by the dumbest of AGW believers, in three points:
1. a scientific consensus says the debate is settled; Fact, end of story.
2. skeptic scientists corrupted by big coal & oil industries seek to ‘reposition’ the public into believing AGW is not a fact.
3. journalists don’t have to give equal weight to skeptic scientists because of the previous two points; they’re corrupt, and few in number.
NOBODY in the mainstream media checked the voracity of that accusation. If skeptic scientists are NOT corrupt, what fallback position do AGW believers have, when skeptic scientists and others are showing so many fatal faults in IPCC reports???