In France, we’ve juste had the confirmation of the penalty given by our media watch ARCOM to a private channel for letting a guy debatting with a ipcc woman and giving his opinion that he does not believe in man made warming. Can you believe it ? An opinion on an opinion media.
This same lot of people (coming from the socialist party) also want to cancel anonymity on the net, you know, to responsibilize (penalize).
In 20y, we have became pretty sovietoid. And the rightwing parties, focusing only on lowering taxes, and not on society issues are letting them do.
Ron, do you know about CFACT: The Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow and Climate Depot? If not, you might be interested in contacting them to see about sharing ideas.
I should have noticed…LOL. I often use the arguments in your genius articles in comments educating Climatists at various websites. Many are still stuck in the 1800s with their debunked arguments. I try to educate them rather than argue with them….the old adage “you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar” approach.
Keep doing what you do and supplying me with material for debate. As a college physics major in the 1960s, I was honored to intern on the NASA Apollo Program. My supervisor was 29 years old and had 3 PhDs….I cherish those memories of walking among giants to this day. We wouldn’t have gotten off the ground using the junk science of today’s GlowBULL Warming “experts.”
While Hanson catalysed the climate scare in the US, I believe it was Canadian Maurice Strong who was the “godfather” of the overall AGW movement. In his powerful UN role he created the various environmental programs with the ultimate objective of redistributing global wealth – using human CO2 emissions as the chosen tool Christopher Booker 2015.docx . A house of cards now collapsing, as you point out in your excellent reviews (I met Strong at an environmental conference in Yellowknife in 1976, while working in the Arctic, and seeing clear evidence of the MWP – Viking ruins, tree stumps north of current tree lines etc.
The original idea for the climate deception came from a theory first put forward in 1896 that had already been disproved and rejected by mainstream science in the 1950’s when Britain’s world-leading expert, C.E.P. Brooks and the American Meteorological Society declared that carbon dioxide can have no measurable impact on Earth’s climate (Brooks, C.E.P., 1951. “Geological and Historical Aspects of Climate Change”.)
In 1998 Maurice Strong hired a computer modeller, Michael Mann from Penn State University to create a graph purporting to show climate statistics for the past 1,000 years. This became a highly publicized image featured in the UN’s Third Assessment Report (2001). It showed what came to be called the “hockey stick” graph (a flat “handle” for the first 900 years, then a sharp incline at the end depicting monumental increases for the modern era). Mann’s graph flattened nine centuries of data by excluding the Medieval Warm Period and a later Little Ice Age.
His graph is being used by the UN IPCC to claim that a catastrophic planetary disaster will occur if carbon dioxide emissions — a trace gas crucial to plant life, but now portrayed as poison — were not curtailed through draconian cuts to business, farming, transportation and energy use in Western nations.
Maurice Strong cleverly put forth the notion of imposing a Carbon Tax to penalize the entire planet for its nasty “carbon emissions” hoping that the majority of people wouldn’t clue in to the fact that the supposed culprit is an inert trace gas that comprises less than 1% of the air we breathe.
And so the circle closes. From the material you dug out, it does appear that it was Strong who essentially “commissioned” Mann to produce the Hockey Stick Graph. Thus flat-lining significant temperature variations over the last 900 years, and “getting rid” of the inconvenient MWP and LIA. Astonishing!
After eight years of hard sleuthing, it was the brilliant Canadians, S. McIntyre and R. McKitrick, who finally succeeded in obtaining the underlying data and methodology behind the graph, showing it was based on just a few carefully selected tree ring analyses and statistical malfeasance.
Without the Hockey Stick Graph some consider the Kyoto Accords would not have been ratified. And we might never have experienced what is the most extensive data manipulation and propaganda campaign in the history of science, eclipsing the persecution of Copernicus and Galileo.
Science Matters 
Happy New Year, Ron.
Cracks appearing in the EU Climate Policy.
Reality Bites … ouch!
LikeLike
Happy New Year Mr Clutz !
In France, we’ve juste had the confirmation of the penalty given by our media watch ARCOM to a private channel for letting a guy debatting with a ipcc woman and giving his opinion that he does not believe in man made warming. Can you believe it ? An opinion on an opinion media.
This same lot of people (coming from the socialist party) also want to cancel anonymity on the net, you know, to responsibilize (penalize).
In 20y, we have became pretty sovietoid. And the rightwing parties, focusing only on lowering taxes, and not on society issues are letting them do.
LikeLike
Thanks for the good wishes, Beth and Geoffray. Hoping for onward and upward.
LikeLike
Ron, do you know about CFACT: The Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow and Climate Depot? If not, you might be interested in contacting them to see about sharing ideas.
https://www.cfact.org/about/
LikeLike
Thanks TEWS for commenting. Yes I am aware of CFACT articles. Note that CFACT is one of the signatories of the article referenced.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I should have noticed…LOL. I often use the arguments in your genius articles in comments educating Climatists at various websites. Many are still stuck in the 1800s with their debunked arguments. I try to educate them rather than argue with them….the old adage “you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar” approach.
Keep doing what you do and supplying me with material for debate. As a college physics major in the 1960s, I was honored to intern on the NASA Apollo Program. My supervisor was 29 years old and had 3 PhDs….I cherish those memories of walking among giants to this day. We wouldn’t have gotten off the ground using the junk science of today’s GlowBULL Warming “experts.”
LikeLike
TEWS, much appreciated. I do find inspiration often visitng climate skeptics sub at Reddit where you are an effective poster.
LikeLiked by 1 person
While Hanson catalysed the climate scare in the US, I believe it was Canadian Maurice Strong who was the “godfather” of the overall AGW movement. In his powerful UN role he created the various environmental programs with the ultimate objective of redistributing global wealth – using human CO2 emissions as the chosen tool Christopher Booker 2015.docx . A house of cards now collapsing, as you point out in your excellent reviews (I met Strong at an environmental conference in Yellowknife in 1976, while working in the Arctic, and seeing clear evidence of the MWP – Viking ruins, tree stumps north of current tree lines etc.
LikeLike
Tony, thanks for that history and context. Here’s the complete story on Maurice Strong’s invention of global warming/climate change:
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/maurice-strong-father-of-the-globalist-eco-control-movement/
LikeLike
More about Maurice Strong that I didn’t know:
The original idea for the climate deception came from a theory first put forward in 1896 that had already been disproved and rejected by mainstream science in the 1950’s when Britain’s world-leading expert, C.E.P. Brooks and the American Meteorological Society declared that carbon dioxide can have no measurable impact on Earth’s climate (Brooks, C.E.P., 1951. “Geological and Historical Aspects of Climate Change”.)
In 1998 Maurice Strong hired a computer modeller, Michael Mann from Penn State University to create a graph purporting to show climate statistics for the past 1,000 years. This became a highly publicized image featured in the UN’s Third Assessment Report (2001). It showed what came to be called the “hockey stick” graph (a flat “handle” for the first 900 years, then a sharp incline at the end depicting monumental increases for the modern era). Mann’s graph flattened nine centuries of data by excluding the Medieval Warm Period and a later Little Ice Age.
His graph is being used by the UN IPCC to claim that a catastrophic planetary disaster will occur if carbon dioxide emissions — a trace gas crucial to plant life, but now portrayed as poison — were not curtailed through draconian cuts to business, farming, transportation and energy use in Western nations.
Maurice Strong cleverly put forth the notion of imposing a Carbon Tax to penalize the entire planet for its nasty “carbon emissions” hoping that the majority of people wouldn’t clue in to the fact that the supposed culprit is an inert trace gas that comprises less than 1% of the air we breathe.
https://blog.nationalcitizensalliance.ca/the-climate-change-hoax-was-engineered-decades-ago/
LikeLiked by 1 person
And so the circle closes. From the material you dug out, it does appear that it was Strong who essentially “commissioned” Mann to produce the Hockey Stick Graph. Thus flat-lining significant temperature variations over the last 900 years, and “getting rid” of the inconvenient MWP and LIA. Astonishing!
After eight years of hard sleuthing, it was the brilliant Canadians, S. McIntyre and R. McKitrick, who finally succeeded in obtaining the underlying data and methodology behind the graph, showing it was based on just a few carefully selected tree ring analyses and statistical malfeasance.
Without the Hockey Stick Graph some consider the Kyoto Accords would not have been ratified. And we might never have experienced what is the most extensive data manipulation and propaganda campaign in the history of science, eclipsing the persecution of Copernicus and Galileo.
LikeLike