Simon Buckle of the Grantham Institute at Imperial has penned some nice thoughts about the Bengtsson affair:
‘Professor Lennart Bengtsson’s resignation from the GWPF Academic Advisory Council has received wide coverage and raises important issues.’
‘received wide coverage’?…..but not from one of the world’s biggest and best resourced news organisations.
And a matter that ‘raises important issues’…….so important that one of the world’s biggest and best resourced news organisations deliberately ignores them.
Proof positive that the BBC is engaged in a cover up and is manipulating climate coverage to hide ‘inconvenient truths’.
The climate lobby is intimidating and threatening other scientists to remain silent about their doubts on the ‘science’……threatening their careers and sometimes threatening the very lives of anyone who dares to raise a sceptical question.
It was the BBC’s very own Harrabin who wanted to punch the sceptical Christopher Booker for ‘spreading lies and disinformation’….or good common sense, truth and reason to you and me.
No doubt who is helping to foster the atmosphere of bullying and threats then.
Buckle from the Grantham Institute went on:
It is regrettable that perceived political stances on the climate issue are apparently so affecting academic activity. The Grantham Institute at Imperial has always opposed such behaviour, believing that scientific progress requires an open society. We try to engage with a wide range of figures, some with radically different views on climate change.
Sorry but his boss, who stumps up the cash for these people says different.
Grantham’s aim is to silence the critics with a bombardment of propaganda:
The misinformation machine is brilliant. As a propagandist myself [he has previously described himself as GMO’s “chief of propaganda” in reference to his official title of “chief investment strategist”], I have nothing but admiration for their propaganda. [Laughs.] But the difference is that we have the facts behind our propaganda. They’re in the “screaming loudly” rather than the “fact based” part of the exercise, because they don’t have the facts. They are masters at manufacturing doubt. What I have noticed on the blogs and in the comments section under articles is that over several years, as the scientific evidence for climate change gets stronger, the tone of the sceptics is getting shriller and more vicious and nastier all the time.
The sceptics are getting angrier and more vicious every year despite the more storms we have, and the more mad crazy weather we have…
One of the problems is that typically you are not dealing with the facts. Putting in more facts makes the sceptics more angry. They have profound beliefs – as opposed to knowledge – that they are willing to protect by all manner of psychological tricks.
Ironically he says…….
If you’re saying something that people don’t want to hear or accept, a significant proportion of them will reply with hostility. Not because they know the facts, or because they have researched it themselves, but because they’re so psychologically involved in believing good news that they will oppose it with a reflex.
Could be talking of the climate fanatic’s response to any scepticism couldn’t he?
Grantham suggests the climate lobby is all sweetness and light despite the relentless, nasty attacks of the sceptics:
The equivalent on the other side is a weary resignation, sorrow and frustration and amazement that people on the other side can’t look at the facts.
We can try to bypass them on one level and we try to contest the political power of the sceptics. They are using money as well as propaganda to influence the politicians, particularly in America.
That from a man who coughs up £165 million to fund his climate propaganda.
So concerned is Grantham, 70, over this issue that he has set up the Grantham Foundation for the Protection of the Environment, endowed with £165m of his own money, to fund environmental research and campaigns. From it he is funding the LSE and Imperial donations, and other grants to American groups such as the Environmental Defense Fund.
Grantham is hoping the sceptics will all die off…the sooner the better:
Changing people’s minds is almost impossible, even among scientists. Max Planck said, to paraphrase, that science advances one funeral at a time. You could add that economics advances the same way. You have to wait to get rid of the people who have career investment in a topic before a new generation can see the light.
Where Grantham’s real loyalties lie…..
Our first responsibility is to make money for our clients….and nothing is more important than oil.
When I was in school the scare stories from the doom mongers was the impending global ice age.
Obviously not enough mileage in that one to keep the army of jobsworths ranting and raving.
Well, the real scientists are predicting a mini-ice-age.
But it wont be all that bad, just a lot of very lovely long Dickensian winters, to make up for the Solar wobble that caused the Global warming scare.
Yes , good Channel 4 programme about Britain`s Extreme Weather last night , on the whole I thought, reasonably “balanced ” & informative .
They tried AGW. But again the planet would not play the game. Now the political scamsters along, with the banksters, have come up with Climate Change.
Too much money and political capital has been invested in this fraud. Nothing will change the minds of politicians except the possibility of electoral defeat . That is why it is futile to challenge the idiocy of the “science” of Climate – it is a scam. It is the electoral prospects of individual politicians and partys that we should be targeting.
Ed Davey, the dim but nasty Climate and Energy Secretary is an MP near me. I am greatly looking forward to helping in campaigning against him next year. For any party that wants my help and has a good chance of winning – anything to unseat Davey, send him back to the obscurity where he belongs. Even if it means neglecting to campaign against dim but rich and nasty Zac Goldsmith in the next-door next door.
Stents – friday I read one specialist saying that a man with heart disease taking stents for twenty years (and living with the side-effects) adds three months onto his life – and quite possibly three months of dementia or dying of cancer.
Today I read Magdi Yacoub saying that everyone over the age of 40 should be on stents.
Science you see – very hard for it to be ‘settled’.
Unless of course it’s a particularly extra-special branch of libby-wibby, drippy-wippy, huggy-wuggy, softy-leftie science.
I read that Diesel fuel has far more real pollutants than Petrol, some cause dementia for the Greenies who use the fuel.
Also, you will go blind or die from Skin cancer due to the low energy light bulbs. Its why I and a lot of eye experts have stocked up on incandescent light bulbs.
I had about one hundred 100w clear bulbs, but about 20 of them have already been used up.
‘The sceptics are getting angrier and more vicious every year despite the more storms we have, and the more mad crazy weather we have…’
Nah, not angry and vicious, just calm and rational:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/05/why-global-warming-alarmism-isnt-science-2.php
The Warmists are getting stuffed by real-world evidence and by their own childish, anti-scientific behaviour. Wonderful stuff to behold.
“The Emperor’s New Clothes” springs to mind.
Piers Corbyn is only angry about being censored. All he wants to say on the BBC is “It all Correlates with the 18th Century Hale Magnetic Solar Cycle induced Weather Trends that existed just before the last mini-ice age” And then he would be much less angry.
Instead we have censorship of any explanation, because if you do not have a scientific explanation for a weather event, then to the primitive and ignorant, that can become solid evidence for Gods revenge, for the sins of Man-made Climate Change.
poor victimised Micheal “hockeystick” Mann?
ooooh yeahhh! … on the BBC you better believe it
Here’s one of his persecutors
http://ricochet.com/podcasts/mark-steyn/
worth a listen.
Digging up a corpse, and sticking some lipstick on it doesn’t make it look any better Al.
BBC Science Website Opinion Survey:-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/0/
I just know the shrinking violets reading this blog will want to advise the Beeb of a few home truths.
Hi! My name is Java! Should I send in my agent? 0