Thirty-Two Climate Change Predictions Proven False

_____________________________

Wall Street Journal: 

Climate Change Alarmism Is ‘a Real Mental Disorder’

THOMAS D. WILLIAMS, PH.D.
31 Jul 2023
 
Climate alarmists’ overwrought accounts of hot summer weather are “fueling mental derangements,” writes the Wall Street Journal’s Allysia Finley in a searing op-ed Monday.

It is not the weather itself, but the hyperbolic way it is reported that spreads panic, Finley insists, since in the past “heat waves were treated as a normal part of summer,” whereas now they are treated as harbingers of an impending climate apocalypse.
Knowingly or not, mainstream media have been complicit in spreading “climate hypochondria,” she writes, which simply does not match the reality of what is happening to the weather and the threats this may or may not pose.


“It isn’t difficult to notice that today’s snowflakes consider hot weather aberrant, similar to how they perceive normal feelings such as anxiety or sadness,” Finley asserts. “But there’s nothing normal about climate anxiety, despite the left’s claims to the contrary.”
Daily data back up Finley’s contentions. On Sunday, The Messenger reported that given the summer’s extreme heat, “we may not live to see climate’s ‘new normal.’” The article goes on to make the scientifically untenable claim that “thousands of deaths” from excessive July heat “can be attributed to human emissions of greenhouse gases.”
The article also repeats warnings of a climate “tipping point” beyond which humanity is doomed, a proposal that further stokes the climate hysteria underscored by Finley.

During a local telecast, Florida meteorologist Steve MacLaughlin uttered a similar threat, assuring viewers he fears we “have reached a point we cannot return from.”
“This is the first time that I’ve been overly concerned that we have reached a point we cannot return from,” MacLaughlin said in a weather report for NBC6 South Florida.
“In 25 years of broadcasting, I’ve never uttered these words on TV before,” the five-time Emmy-winning reporter wrote on Twitter. “I try to stay positive. I report on not just the problem, but the solution. I try to not be alarmist. But with corals, sirens should be blaring.”
Meanwhile, on Monday the Washington Post declared that the world is “boiling,” echoing breathless predictions from U.N. Secretary General António Guterres, who stated last Thursday that “the era of global boiling has arrived.”
The once-sober Associated Press joined in the melee, reporting Monday that as climate change produces hotter and longer heat waves, air conditioning “is now a matter of survival.”

Most people can read these reports and take them with a grain of salt, mentally toning down the obvious hyperbole and exercising critical thinking to form an objective opinion of the situation. They may consider, for instance, that many more people die each year from cold weather than from heat, or that globally fewer and fewer people die every year from weather-related events.

The problem, Finley suggests, is for those who are swept along by the alarmism, allowing themselves to be overwhelmed by irrational fear from prophecies of a rapidly imploding world.

“Climate hypochondriacs deserve to be treated with compassion, much like anyone who suffers from mental illness,” she concludes. “They shouldn’t, however, expect everyone else to enable their neuroses.”

_____________________________

"In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution [...] By 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half." - Life Magazine, 30 January 1970, p. 22

_____________________ 

Climate Change Fascists in Australia tell children to send malware propaganda to their own grandparents !

By Jo Nova

Malware to save the planet eh?

The Australian Youth Climate Coalition (AYCC) is asking supporters to send deceptive links out to friends and family that look like a cookie recipe but embed software cookies instead on the victim’s computer. The digital cookies then pushes green climate videos into their feeds, (as if the ABC news wasn’t loaded enough).

Look out for any links to oneminutecookie.com.

The AYCC gets about $3m in donations, and even visits schools, teaching children how to cheat and lie to save the planet, or something like that. What are good family relationships built on after all, if not deception? What is science if it is not propaganda?

These are all good questions to raise with the children in your life and the schools in your area.  Don’t wait for an email to arrive, thank the AYCC for providing the opportunity to start the conversation now.

If the believers are so caring, ethical and moral why are they teaching children it’s OK to deceive family members? Is this the kind of “fair and just” world we want to live in?

Call up schools and the local P&C and ask if they are aware the AYCC — which runs programs in schools  — teaches children to fool  parents and grandparents and use malware. Are these the kind of family values that belong in our schools? Will the local school guarantee that they will not allow this group to manipulate children?

The Australian exposed their crooked game this week, and traffic to oneminutecookies.com has fallen to zero. So presumably the link trap will change. (The campaign has been put on hold).

Reporter Joseph Lam spoke to cyber security experts at Check Point Research:

The company’s tech evangelist Ashwin Ram, one of Australia’s top 100 Innovators, said the technique was not common but was something he imagined cyber criminals would use as part of phishing campaigns.

Mr Ram said cookies were used to “enhance the user experience”, but in the case of AYCC campaign, “it looks like the goal here was to lure sceptics of climate change to oneminutecookie.com”. He adds: “While the site looks innocent, a victim’s browser will store cookies that will affect their browsing experience by displaying content to support a particular narrative.”

If the evidence for climate change is so overwhelming, why don’t they use that to win friends and influence people instead of phishing tricks that criminals might use?

The best lesson children can learn today is that fascists and communists have always taught children to lie. It’s a means to an end            .  Read the confessions of a Red Guard — “I have led a life haunted by guilt”.  Raised fists might not be the symbol that lifts you.

_________

"Eco-Friendly" Electric Vehicle

______________________________________

Ford Motors Has Lost $32,000 for Every EV Sold in 2023 and Expects EV Business to Lose $4.5 Billion

EVs are Becoming Uninsurable

________________________

Peer reviewed papers aren't worth the paper they're written on. This is heresy to Darwinists and priests of *climate change*.

"The journal Nature published a study that attempted to confirm the findings of 53 prominent peer-reviewed papers that present results of lab experiments related to cancer drugs. The scientists were unable to reproduce 94 percent of these results, despite the fact that “when findings could not be reproduced, an attempt was made to contact the original authors, discuss the discrepant findings, exchange reagents and repeat experiments under the authors’ direction, occasionally even in the laboratory of the original investigator.”

The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences published a “detailed review“ of “2,047 biomedical and life-science research articles” that have been retracted. It found that “21.3% of retractions were attributable to error” and “67.4% of retractions were attributable to misconduct, including fraud or suspected fraud (43.4%), duplicate publication (14.2%), and plagiarism (9.8%).” The authors also noted that “incomplete, uninformative or misleading retraction announcements have led to a previous underestimation of the role of fraud in the ongoing retraction epidemic.”

BioMed Central announced that it had “identified 43 articles” in its peer-reviewed journals “that were published on the basis of reviews from fabricated reviewers.”

the journal Tumor Biology retracted more than 100 papers because the editors had “strong reason to believe that the peer review process was compromised.”

Phil Hurst, a publisher for the Royal Society, wrote that “traditional peer review is confidential, with research papers scrutinized by a small number of anonymous experts. Although publishers are vigilant, this secrecy provides the opportunity for fraud.”

Austin L. Hughes, a professor of biological sciences at the University of South Carolina, wrote that “the high confidence in funding and peer-review panels should seem misplaced to anyone who has served on these panels and witnessed the extent to which preconceived notions, personal vendettas, and the like can torpedo even the best proposals.”

The journal PLOS ONE published an analysis of peer-review practices that states:

“Peer review is the main process by which scientists communicate their work, and is widely regarded as a gatekeeper of the quality of published research. However, its effectiveness remains largely assumed rather than demonstrated.”

Peer review “haslimited tools to safeguard the efficiency of the process.”

“Reviewers are typically protected by anonymity, and are not rewarded for an accurate and fair job nor held accountable for a sloppy or biased one. Reviewers are thus under little incentive to act in the best interest of science as opposed to their own best interest.”

“We find that the biggest hazard to the quality of published literature is not selfish rejection of high-quality manuscripts but indifferent acceptance of low-quality ones.”

Dr. Andy Farke, a vertebrate paleontologist and editor for the scientific journals PLOS ONE and PeerJ, wrote, “I have seen errors or editorial/reviewer lapses in pretty much every journal I have read.”

The journal Nature published an analysis of peer-reviewed papers conducted by “a group of researchers working on obesity, nutrition and energetics.” They found:

“In the course of assembling weekly lists of articles in our field, we began noticing more peer-reviewed articles containing what we call substantial or invalidating errors.”

“After attempting to address more than 25 of these errors with letters to authors or journals, and identifying at least a dozen more, we had to stop—the work took too much of our time.”

“Our efforts revealed invalidating practices that occur repeatedly … and showed how journals and authors react when faced with mistakes that need correction.”

Drummond Rennie, former deputy editor of the New England Journal of Medicine and of the Journal of the American Medical Association, affirmed there “are scarcely any bars to eventual publication” in peer-reviewed journals. Emphasizing the point, he added, “There seems to be no study too fragmented, no hypothesis too trivial, no literature citation too biased or too egotistical, no design too warped, no methodology too bungled, no presentation of results too inaccurate, too obscure, and too contradictory, no analysis too self-serving, no argument too circular, no conclusions too trifling or too unjustified, and no grammar and syntax too offensive for a paper to end up in print.”

https://fee.org/articles/epa-s-lack-...-junk-science/

 

Diederick Stapel, sociologist in Netherlands, had at least 55 *scholarly* papers published which were frauds.