SEARCH
Follow the Money Corrupts: “Junk Climate Science”
Related: climate science, design is destiny, dumb energy, follow the money, follow the self-interest, woke psychopathology
re: follow the money and follow the self-interest
re: climate science
re: American Thinker
Follow the money will never lead you wrong, even when there is seemingly no reason.
See also, climate change portion of Woke Religion Taxonomy.
American Thinker: Junk Climate Science
2024-01-01, by Norman Rogers
...Global warming religion originates in well-financed scientific organizations such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The scientific basis of the catastrophe theory is junk science made to seem authoritative by dressing it up with lengthy reports based on dubious computer models. These organizations and scientists greatly benefit from rivers of government money and bask in the prestige that comes from being credible-seeming prophets.
...At one Gordon Conference a former insider at the National Science Foundation stood up and said that the NSF was corrupt in various ways, for example directing grants to their friends. You could have heard a pin drop. Nobody defended the NSF and nobody agreed with the critic. They all pretended to be turtles. Presumably most of them had pending grant applications or plans to submit applications.
...Models are evaluated by simulating past climate to see how well the model can track it...
...Academic life is in varying degrees oppressive. Scientists go through a long apprenticeship starting as graduate students... there are no early career mainstream climate scientists that are public critics of the orthodoxy. If one should emerge, he would be looking for a new line of work very quickly.
...As exhaustively documented by the websites realclimatescience.com and wattsupwiththat.com there is nothing new about climate doomsday predictions. What’s worse the official climate records of the government are both unreliable and tampered with.
...Once after the AGU climate banquet in San Francisco I was walking through Chinatown with a prominent senior scientist that had dissented to an extent from orthodoxy. We encountered another scientist, and my friend introduced me as his favorite skeptic. The other scientist became angry, and my friend became obviously upset if not fearful. My friend was making the mistake of associating with me, a subversive. Climate scientists that associate with the wrong people can lose their jobs.
I don’t want to exaggerate. American universities and research institutions are not North Korea. I think casual skepticism is tolerated. Skepticism becomes a problem when the orthodoxy is criticized in scientific or public forums.
...The only scalable method of generating electricity without CO2 is nuclear and the environmental left hates nuclear even though they claim to be terrified of global warming. You can read my book, Dumb Energy @AMAZON, if you want the details.
Corruption of science is not new. Examples include Lysenkoism, Pathological Science, and Cold Fusion. Wrong science may be driven by individual and organizational self-interest but it can also be the consequence of wishful thinking, confirmation bias, or honest mistakes.
Norm Rogers educated as a physicist was a cofounder of Rabbit Semiconductor. He has written many articles concerning global warming and green energy. He has a website. He is a member of the board of directors of the CO2 Coalition and was formerly on the board of the National Association of Scholars.
WIND: climate science has become an oxymoron. Money corrupts, and glaciers of it corrupt absolutely, including the “solutions” which are nothing but gravy trains for grifters and parasites.
Computer models are not science, never have been and never will be. All models are persuasion aka propaganda. And most of all... intellectual masturbation. Models integrate the biases/knowledge/ignorance of those creating them. What is included and not included (intenionally or out of ignorance) produces GIGO that has no predictive power. Unless the data is “corrected” to make the model work another year or so. Which sums up the entire field and it’s looney tunes predictions: junk data, junk science, junk ethics, junk appliances.
No climate science model has ever worked, so every one of them is silently discarded sooner or later. The whole thing is a pathetic anti-scientific load of bunk that parasitic grifters use to line their pockets, all in order to literally kill people by making energy expensive and keeping poor people in poverty—the most racist and discriminatory social policy out there ranking right up with DEI and CRT.
