Sad but true. Is it surprising that journalists-cum-propagandists are the norm? We're being attacked by people who want to force their (misguided) beliefs on the rest of us.
I'm working to insure that everyone gets a shot at the truth. Let me know what you think?
A resolution by the Motorcycle Riders Foundation, motorcycle and automotive groups to Congress to demand scientific transparency and truth for every motoring individual in the world.
Whereas Truth and Free Speech are the cornerstones of our society, motorcyclists all over the country want our rights and the truth to be respected
Whereas Critical Thinking is the backbone of science it needs to be held high for kids all over the world. America always endeavored to be the bastion of truth and free speech.
Whereas science is never settled and the public requires nothing but the truth as it affects their very existence.
Whereas children deserve to know the truth and scientific transparency. No matter who tries to hide the truth, it will surface and the real deniers will be exposed.
Whereas every law in this country that effects the lives, livelihoods, homes, businesses and transportation must be based on truth or they are meaningless.
Whereas criminal governments throughout history restricted free speech. We cannot allow any attack on free speech to infiltrate our government.
You are absolutely right. I have recently declined to apply to some editorial jobs overseeing climate coverage for which I was well qualified, having covered climate since before James Hansen's congressional testimony. I lost interest in the jobs when I read the descriptions, and it was clear they were interested in hype and hysteria, as you described, not the kind of journalism I have practiced for 7 decades, which includes viewing all claims, in any direction, with skepticism, and reflecting that in coverage.
"Covering Climate Now" is a climate crisis advocacy group run out of the Columbia School of Journalism. It has as members that include most wire services (AFP, AP, Bloomberg, UPI), many major and minor newspapers ) (including the Daily Camera), and just about all broadcast news outlets. They claim to reach over 2 billion people. Each week they will take a topic and try to have their members push a particular them. I believe they are behind much of the crisis coverage.
Another issue is that in media outlets and cutbacks, we have lost specialist science reporters whose experiences led them to some levels of appropriate skepticism.Plus they had some idea of the landscape of disciplines and whom to call. That expertise seems to have been lost. Also external NGO funding of reporting, which is not particularly interested in dispassionate looks at scientific controversies or even different narratives.
1. This says it all, tells me we are not dealing with science (shocker right?). "multiple journalists have told me in conversations that there is no way they can ever be seen to engage with me, as it is a professional hazard." Burn it all to the ground.
2. The sub-header, "Coverage of climate has become more about narrative promotion than news", change "promotion" to "control", narrative control is what we have been discussing.
And its everywhere.
See coveringclimatenow.org, orwellian star chamber at Columbia but as we are finding out that only scratches the surface.
Regarding the scare stories, no different than the book Koonin wrote, then he suffered personal attacks (sorry, "fact checks") by attack dogs like Hausfather. That Koonin then debunked.
One question I have for a future issue of Honest Broker is "what do climate modelers think about whether rates of change will accelerate in the future? Is the current rate of change (say in average temperatures for the US) likely to increase? Does it depend on assumptions about future emissions?
The most salient observation about the gang who promote these CC Fear Porn Narratives is they also just as vigorously promote dumb, ineffective non-solutions like Wind, Solar, Batteries & Hydrogen. And almost all of them are antagonistic to the REAL solutions which are Nuclear & Methanol. In fact their long historical opposition to Nuclear energy makes them more than anyone else the cause of excess GHG emissions.
The whats of the official Climate Narratives are pretty easy to describe. The probable whys aren't all that hard, either. There's a adage out there which goes something like "never fail to take advantage of a crisis". There are trillions of dollars at stake in response to a changing climate and many entrepreneurs out there looking to capture their share and preferably more...a lot more. Then there's basic human nature. People want to feel good and what could feel better than saving the planet and human life itself?
Here's the thing, though. This particular game is played all day every day in other spheres and in other contexts. A driving force of this particular game is "Politics". A cursory look at how the U.S. Federal Budget is spent tells you everything you need to know. Unfortunately, there are actual effects to a changing climate and it becoming just another part of the game is bad for everyone. It's good to know that despite the noise there are successes occurring. It would be even better if the narrative would become fact and science-based and leading to real-world solutions, but I'm not holding my breath on that one.
Apr 28, 2023·edited Apr 28, 2023Liked by Roger Pielke Jr.
As always, I like to look at the underlying motivations for these observations. If climate change is an existential threat that’s already impacting just about every aspect of life, then that provides the rationale for taking drastic action. That action generally seems to involve more power accruing to government (at many levels) in order to control how people live (by raising the cost of energy, for example).
Power and Control. These are age old themes. Climate change is a powerful pretext for advancing this agenda. Of course the ones promoting it believe they will be part of the group that has the power and control.
Note that I’m not denying that climate change is occurring, nor that it shouldn’t be mitigated when possible. However, we keep seeing this tendency to exaggerate many aspects of it.
The evidence from evolutionary psychology demonstrates clearly that we organize our thinking according to narratives; that we are capable of believing anything; that when presented with contrary data we tend to double down on our beliefs; and that we tend to align within groups reflecting our tribal origins and when we do align, we become stupid and frequently delusional. It's a problem!!
Because the people who formerly reported on and even investigated have joined the climate beat a whole section of the media has been silenced in criticising what is mainly a political movement. The public swallow it all.
This silence has been bought and paid for by the likes of Bill Gates who pays for a section in the British Daily Telegraph to faithfully promote his views and nothing else. Pravda. Niet.
Sad but true. Is it surprising that journalists-cum-propagandists are the norm? We're being attacked by people who want to force their (misguided) beliefs on the rest of us.
I'm working to insure that everyone gets a shot at the truth. Let me know what you think?
A resolution by the Motorcycle Riders Foundation, motorcycle and automotive groups to Congress to demand scientific transparency and truth for every motoring individual in the world.
Whereas Truth and Free Speech are the cornerstones of our society, motorcyclists all over the country want our rights and the truth to be respected
Whereas Critical Thinking is the backbone of science it needs to be held high for kids all over the world. America always endeavored to be the bastion of truth and free speech.
Whereas science is never settled and the public requires nothing but the truth as it affects their very existence.
Whereas children deserve to know the truth and scientific transparency. No matter who tries to hide the truth, it will surface and the real deniers will be exposed.
Whereas every law in this country that effects the lives, livelihoods, homes, businesses and transportation must be based on truth or they are meaningless.
Whereas criminal governments throughout history restricted free speech. We cannot allow any attack on free speech to infiltrate our government.
A rough draft by K. Ball
You are absolutely right. I have recently declined to apply to some editorial jobs overseeing climate coverage for which I was well qualified, having covered climate since before James Hansen's congressional testimony. I lost interest in the jobs when I read the descriptions, and it was clear they were interested in hype and hysteria, as you described, not the kind of journalism I have practiced for 7 decades, which includes viewing all claims, in any direction, with skepticism, and reflecting that in coverage.
"Covering Climate Now" is a climate crisis advocacy group run out of the Columbia School of Journalism. It has as members that include most wire services (AFP, AP, Bloomberg, UPI), many major and minor newspapers ) (including the Daily Camera), and just about all broadcast news outlets. They claim to reach over 2 billion people. Each week they will take a topic and try to have their members push a particular them. I believe they are behind much of the crisis coverage.
Another issue is that in media outlets and cutbacks, we have lost specialist science reporters whose experiences led them to some levels of appropriate skepticism.Plus they had some idea of the landscape of disciplines and whom to call. That expertise seems to have been lost. Also external NGO funding of reporting, which is not particularly interested in dispassionate looks at scientific controversies or even different narratives.
1. This says it all, tells me we are not dealing with science (shocker right?). "multiple journalists have told me in conversations that there is no way they can ever be seen to engage with me, as it is a professional hazard." Burn it all to the ground.
2. The sub-header, "Coverage of climate has become more about narrative promotion than news", change "promotion" to "control", narrative control is what we have been discussing.
And its everywhere.
See coveringclimatenow.org, orwellian star chamber at Columbia but as we are finding out that only scratches the surface.
Regarding the scare stories, no different than the book Koonin wrote, then he suffered personal attacks (sorry, "fact checks") by attack dogs like Hausfather. That Koonin then debunked.
As always, i hope you survive the weekend.
We like you.
I just posted about a recent one at the WaPo. I think part of it is that the new crop of climate reporters don't realize that there are scientists who know about adaptation. Because sadly, our disciplines are not cool. https://forestpolicypub.com/2023/04/28/science-friday-can-forest-trees-adapt-to-climate-change-i-questions-raised-in-recent-wapo-story/
One question I have for a future issue of Honest Broker is "what do climate modelers think about whether rates of change will accelerate in the future? Is the current rate of change (say in average temperatures for the US) likely to increase? Does it depend on assumptions about future emissions?
Thanks!
This article by Fred Pearce is such an exception to the rule. I love sharing it
https://e360.yale.edu/features/its-not-just-climate-are-we-ignoring-other-causes-of-disasters
The most salient observation about the gang who promote these CC Fear Porn Narratives is they also just as vigorously promote dumb, ineffective non-solutions like Wind, Solar, Batteries & Hydrogen. And almost all of them are antagonistic to the REAL solutions which are Nuclear & Methanol. In fact their long historical opposition to Nuclear energy makes them more than anyone else the cause of excess GHG emissions.
What do you think of "Covering Climate Now" as an organization that orchestrates one sided coverage?
The whats of the official Climate Narratives are pretty easy to describe. The probable whys aren't all that hard, either. There's a adage out there which goes something like "never fail to take advantage of a crisis". There are trillions of dollars at stake in response to a changing climate and many entrepreneurs out there looking to capture their share and preferably more...a lot more. Then there's basic human nature. People want to feel good and what could feel better than saving the planet and human life itself?
Here's the thing, though. This particular game is played all day every day in other spheres and in other contexts. A driving force of this particular game is "Politics". A cursory look at how the U.S. Federal Budget is spent tells you everything you need to know. Unfortunately, there are actual effects to a changing climate and it becoming just another part of the game is bad for everyone. It's good to know that despite the noise there are successes occurring. It would be even better if the narrative would become fact and science-based and leading to real-world solutions, but I'm not holding my breath on that one.
As always, I like to look at the underlying motivations for these observations. If climate change is an existential threat that’s already impacting just about every aspect of life, then that provides the rationale for taking drastic action. That action generally seems to involve more power accruing to government (at many levels) in order to control how people live (by raising the cost of energy, for example).
Power and Control. These are age old themes. Climate change is a powerful pretext for advancing this agenda. Of course the ones promoting it believe they will be part of the group that has the power and control.
Note that I’m not denying that climate change is occurring, nor that it shouldn’t be mitigated when possible. However, we keep seeing this tendency to exaggerate many aspects of it.
Good one! As usual.
The evidence from evolutionary psychology demonstrates clearly that we organize our thinking according to narratives; that we are capable of believing anything; that when presented with contrary data we tend to double down on our beliefs; and that we tend to align within groups reflecting our tribal origins and when we do align, we become stupid and frequently delusional. It's a problem!!
Pretty clear and nothing can be denied in it.
Because the people who formerly reported on and even investigated have joined the climate beat a whole section of the media has been silenced in criticising what is mainly a political movement. The public swallow it all.
This silence has been bought and paid for by the likes of Bill Gates who pays for a section in the British Daily Telegraph to faithfully promote his views and nothing else. Pravda. Niet.