Links tagged “97”
- ‘Junk keyword survey’: Climate purity alarm goes ding! 99% of scientists ‘believe’ because the others got sacked
Jo Nova: By studying words in industry publications, Mark Lynas thinks he’s discovered a scientific truth. Instead he has just shown that skeptics get purged from peer review. It’s official now, 99% of peer-reviewed articles have to say they believe in order to get published. He thought he was doing climate science but instead he studied sociology. If Mark Lynas proved anything it’s that he doesn’t know what science is, and only unskeptical papers pass peer review. It’s a sad sad statement about the state of the scientific-industry.
- New warmist study ups alleged 97% climate consensus to 99.9%! – Analysis: ‘The Irrelevancy of Lynas ‘99.9 Percent Certainty Climate Change’ Consensus’
- Nobel-Prize Winning Physicist Dr. Ivar Giaever compares ‘global warming’ to Lysenkoism – Rips ‘consensus’ claims: ‘Science cannot be verified by votes; either you are correct, or you are not’
- ‘We have to fight back’: John Kerry calls on scientists to lead fight against climate denial – Warns world is ‘right now crossing the long-awaiting tipping point’
John Kerry: "We have to establish a baseline of truth or we can’t build consensus in a democracy." ... "Paid-for denial" are "costing us enormously", he added.
Kerry said achieving climate goals fast enough amounted to "a moonshot on steroids" - and called on scientists to help communicate to the public the urgent need for swift action. "Scientists want to avoid the fray - but we are in a war against denial," he said. "I think we have to fight back, and I think scientists have to be at the front of that fight."
He believes the world is "right now crossing the long-awaiting tipping point" toward greater action on climate change, as social movements, innovation and falling costs help drive more net-zero emissions promises and accelerate green measures. "We have the solutions we need, and we are gaining the political will to implement them," he said.
- We should return to Michael Crichton’s way of thinking
"I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled." — Michael Crichton
- ‘97% consensus is a convenient fiction’ – Meteorologist Joe D’Aleo rebuts the 11 most common climate claims
- Book Excerpt – Chapter 3: ‘Pulled from Thin Air’: Debunking the 97% ‘Consensus’ – ‘The Politically Incorrect Guide to Climate Change’
- Distinguishing Truth From Green Propaganda
- Watch: Lord Monckton & the Anti-Greta Naomi Seibt discuss the ‘97% Consensus fraud’
- NASA fights campaign to remove 97% climate-change claim as ‘consensus’ challenged
Climate Depot’s Marc Morano, author of “The Politically Incorrect Guide to Climate Change,” took a jab at the consensus “myth,” saying it was “about time NASA is forced to confront its part in repeating the 97% claim.” “NASA is likely to fight tooth and nail over this false 97% claim because NASA has a vested interest in keeping up the ‘consensus’ myth,” Mr. Morano said in an email. “Sadly, NASA has long been overrun with many scientists who are willing to bend the truth for the climate cause.”
Morano's further comment: "It is about time NASA is forced to confront its part in repeating the 97% 'consensus' claims. The studies that claim a '97% consensus' are deeply flawed and designed to silence any debate on climate change. One of the 97% studies was not even based on 97 scientists, but an anonymous 77 scientists that were whittled down from a much larger survey of scientists. NASA does not care that the 97% claim is fabricated. The lead 'climate change' scientist is Gavin Schmidt and he has openly gone political and promoted carbon taxes and consensus while serving at NASA.'
-
The New Yorker mag claims the refrigerator is ‘an Agent of Climate Catastrophe’
New Yorker claims air conditioners are the culprits “of our unfolding climate catastrophe.”
Rebuttal: The “notion that refrigeration is contributing to a ‘climate catastrophe’ is preposterous,” Steve Milloy of JunkScience.com noted. He also pointed out that the leftist “war against refrigeration” goes all the way back to the 1970s. The “war” has since resurfaced under President Joe Biden’s push for ratification of the radical Kigali Amendment, which seeks to phase out HFCs on a global scale to fight climate change.
-
CBS Mornings co-host Nate Burleson Ties Massive Volcano, Tsunami to ‘Climate Change’
CBS's Nate Burleson ties the underwater volcanic eruption and 50-foot-high tsunami in Tonga to climate change: "We talk about climate change quite a bit. These stories are a harsh reality of what we're going through and we have to do our part because these are more frequent." ...And, when called out, he denied having said something untrue and may have copy-pasted the first result from Google Images of “volcano climate change.”
-
‘Global warming’ has saved 500,000 lives in England & Wales in the last 20 years – ‘Cold temperature deaths greatly outnumbers deaths associated with warm temperatures’
-
‘Unprecedentedly few’: ‘2021 had the fewest global hurricanes in the satellite era’ & 2nd fewest strong hurricanes since 1980
. Bjorn Lomborg: "Hurricanes in 2021 were unprecedented — as in unprecedentedly few. Globally, 2021 had the fewest hurricanes ever in the satellite era (1980-2021). Globally, 2021 had some of the fewest strong hurricanes in the satellite era (1980-2021). With 16 strong (Cat 3+) hurricanes, 2021 was the second-lowest strong hurricane year since 1980. Globally, 2021 was a weak hurricane year. When measured by total energy (Accumulated Cyclone Energy), 2021 was the 9th weakest year. Did you see that reported anywhere?
Hurricanes in 2021 were weak and exceptionally few. But we heard lots about North Atlantic hurricanes. Conveniently, North Atlantic is the only basin where hurricanes are stronger. Does this leave us well-informed?. But we hear lots about names storms (hurricanes + weaker storms). Ever-easier to detect, so numbers keep climbing (4 of 2020s 30 named storms wouldn't have been named in 2000!). Not as relevant, but hey, scary numbers."
