with the credibility of climate change scientists in doubt, some of them have responded by doubling down. They dismiss Climategate as trivial, increasing their criticism of skeptics as ignorant, unscientific and tools of fossil fuel companies. And of course they continue to churn out studies finding more harmful effects of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming (CAGW), despite the lack of evidence that computer models can accurately depict climate decades into the future.
That approach has backfired, says The Moderate Voice:
Another credibility problem arises from the incessant claims that there is scientific “consensus” about AGW. When people that hear that claim are also aware of the very real dissenters and doubters including at least some scientists as well as the studies that present data that at least calls AGW theory into doubt, they naturally wonder what else global warming theory promoters might be lying about. For those familiar with the scientific method, the methodological defect of a “non-falsifiable theory” which occurred after AGW was recast as more generic and bi-directional “climate change” exacerbates the credibility problem.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- 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
- “records going back to 1961”
- Analyzing Rainfall At Asheville
- Historical Weather Analysis With Visitech
- “American Summers Are Starting to Feel Like Winter”
- Joker And Midnight Toker
- Cheering Crowds
- Understanding Flood Mechanisms
- Extreme Weather
- 70C At Lisbon
- Grok Defending The Climate Scam
- “Earlier Than Usual”
- Perfect Correlation
- Elon’s Hockey Stick
Recent Comments
- arn on Climate Attribution In Greece
- conrad ziefle on Climate Attribution In Greece
- arn on Climate Attribution In Greece
- conrad ziefle on Climate Attribution In Greece
- arn on Climate Attribution In Greece
- Bob G on Climate Attribution In Greece
- arn on Climate Attribution In Greece
- conrad ziefle on Climate Attribution In Greece
- Bob G on Climate Attribution In Greece
- conrad ziefle on Climate Attribution In Greece
AGW was recast as more generic and bi-directional “climate change”
I like that – says it all.
I’d double down too if I thought my gravy train was about to come off of its rails.
Speaking of polls…..
The poll showed 58 percent of Democrats approve of the deal, compared with just 26 percent of Republicans. A whopping 64 percent of Republicans disapproved.
Mitch, John? Did you catch that? 2/3 of your party believe you sold out! Do the right thing and step down.
According to Rasmussen’s latest poll, only 25% of Americans believe the science is settled.
“69% Say It’s Likely Scientists Have Falsified Global Warming Research.”
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/environment_energy/69_say_it_s_likely_scientists_have_falsified_global_warming_research
How can you tell an alarmist is lying? He is an alarmist, right?
The alarmists have so muddied the waters and so embellished their claims that most people simply tune them out.