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
- New Climate Metric
- Bad-Faith Trial Misconduct
- Food And Energy Experts
- “Are We Imagining It?”
- The Suffragettes
- Michael Mann Upset
- A Serious Problem
- Miami Drowning
- No Longer The Greatest Existential Threat
- Almost Unanimous Consensus Of Scientists
- Maryland To Drown
- Rapid Virus Mutation
- Wisconsin To Save The Planet
- Magical Musk
- “Scientists Forecast”
- “thing of the past” update
- Defunding The Climate Scam
- “Record Low Sea Ice”
- Leader Of The Free World
- Measuring The Heat
- Bankrupting The #1 Climate Fraud
- Cyclone Mahina
- “tropical paradise”
- “The tragedy of modern war”
- Manhattan Project Victims
Recent Comments
- conrad ziefle on Food And Energy Experts
- conrad ziefle on Bad-Faith Trial Misconduct
- conrad ziefle on New Climate Metric
- Gamecock on New Climate Metric
- Bill on New Climate Metric
- Robertvd on The Suffragettes
- arn on Bad-Faith Trial Misconduct
- arn on New Climate Metric
- arn on The Suffragettes
- william on The Suffragettes
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.