Katherine Hayhoe is going to tell students at Texas Tech this Saturday that she knows how to control the climate.
The Citizens’ Climate Lobby and the Texas Tech Student Government Association are co-sponsoring a two-part event called “Realities of a Changing Climate: Solutions for a Brighter Future” on Saturday from 1-3:30 p.m. in room 169 of the Human Sciences Building at Tech. Katharine Hayhoe will speak on what is happening and why it’s a problem during the first hour of the event. Hayhoe is also a member of the advisory board of the national Citizens’ Climate Education.
Katherine expresses her personal opinion as plural, and says that droughts in the central and southwest US are going to get worse.
She can be concerned about anything she wants. But the data shows that she doesn’t know what she is talking about. Droughts in the corn belt have become much less common and much less intense over the past 120 years.
Climate at a Glance | National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)
Droughts in the wheat belt have become much less common and much less intense over the past 120 years.
Climate at a Glance | National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)
However, during the Little Ice Age, sand dunes covered the Great Plains, and California mountain lakes dried up completely.
Drought in the Southwest is caused by cold Pacific water, not warm water. When the Pacific warms up (like 2015) Texas and the southwest get very wet.
Texas is expecting floods this weekend, as Katherine Hayhoe pollutes children’s minds with her snake oil pitch about drought.
Of course she uses the magic word “may” whenever she projects-predicts-warns-panics.
another word that comes in handy is “could”
All you need to know…
She is an “Associate Professor in the department of POLITICAL science.” [Emphasis added]
Political Science!! really?!
We have to be careful and honest here, she is in the political science department, but she has a PhD in Atmospheric Science.
I have here book, only for the purpose of analyzing what she says. As usual, items start with accuracy and then get embellished with skewed info.
As a retired Chem/Physics instructor the new science of absolutes, which takes hypothesis which can’t be proven, skips theory and lands on flawed settled science immersed in emotion is antithetical to scientific procedure as I was taught.
Crash, Political Science – so she is probably schooled in Psychological operations (psych-ops or psy-ops)
Propaganda
Create effective propaganda that changes attitudes This is achieved if people identify with a new or changed mission. Propaganda is used to extend this identification to increase popular support for a mission and provide points of convergence for transformative action.
Propaganda Teams
Form Propaganda Teams by selecting and training persuasive, motivated people, who move within an organization and encourage people to support the organizational mission. Trained Propaganda Teams can provide a multi-stage persuasion program that integrates strategic planning with organizational attitudes. Propaganda Teams can also provide feedback about rumors and attitude changes. This role is fulfilled by secret police in authoritarian societies.
http://www.systemiccoaching.com/psych-ops.htm
Psych-ops operations have maximum effect with people who:
– have little education
– accept information uncritically
– benefit from the proposed change
– want to believe the propaganda
– do not wish to understand their own motivations
Hey all you TT Red Raiders check them off and tell us how many check marks to you have?
I have been in contact with Jen Marohasy in Australia.
For the first time, politicians there listened to both sides of an argument.
She and Robert Carter presented observed facts, the alarmists presented computer generated and homogenized figures which they were forced to acknowledge. Score one for honesty.
and score for one for putting a nick in the alarmist armor.
I would suggest that much of will be presented in Texas, is manipulated extrapolations, which always have skewed assumptions and infills as desired.
I would like to be there, but I am sure I would be seen as an undesirable.
To help conclude the AGW debate, respond to the ResearchGate survey, “Is there convincing evidence of AGW?”
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_there_convincing_evidence_of_AGW
There was a time when mainstream science would run away for that type of crackpot. Now mainstream science, totally corrupted by Government funding, embraces crackpots.
None of the mainstream scientists on ResearchGate have been willing to claim convincing evidence of AGW.
Certainly not when the rain is for all the world to see.
https://youtu.be/lst92qxSF28
As an aside, it’s always incredible the level of control those drivers have in the wet conditions, as the cars dance around.