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
- Analyzing The Western Water Crisis
- Gaslighting 1924
- “Why Do You Resist?”
- Climate Attribution Model
- Fact Checking NASA
- Fact Checking Grok
- Fact Checking The New York Times
- New Visitech Features
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- Debt-Free US Treasury Forecast
- Analyzing Big City Crime (Part 2)
- Analyzing Big City Crime
- UK Migration Caused By Global Warming
- Climate Attribution In Greece
- “Brown: ’50 days to save world'”
- The Catastrophic Influence of Bovine Methane Emissions on Extraterrestrial Climate Patterns
- Posting On X
- Seventeen Years Of Fun
- The Importance Of Good Tools
- Temperature Shifts At Blue Hill, MA
- CO2²
- Time Of Observation Bias
- Climate Scamming For Profit
- Climate Scamming For Profit
- Back To The Future
Recent Comments
- Bob G on Analyzing The Western Water Crisis
- Bob G on Analyzing The Western Water Crisis
- Mike Peinsipp on Analyzing The Western Water Crisis
- Bob G on Analyzing The Western Water Crisis
- Bob G on Analyzing The Western Water Crisis
- Robertvd on Analyzing The Western Water Crisis
- Bob G on Analyzing The Western Water Crisis
- conrad ziefle on Analyzing The Western Water Crisis
- Bob G on Analyzing The Western Water Crisis
- Bob G on Analyzing The Western Water Crisis
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???