climate denial – Membrane.com

Climate Denial Part III: The Climate Denier Syndrome

Posted on 2023/09/072023/09/07 by admin

by Daniel Brouse
Climate Scientist

In Part I, A Climate Denier Making a “False Narrative” Political Stand, Darren Wolfe made a host of false and misleading statements about climate change.

In Part II, Freedom of Speech, we explained how making false climate claims is equivalent to telling people to ignore the fire alarm in a crowded theater during a fire.

In Part III, Ken Kaplan explains The Climate Denier Syndrome.

“A survey of 468 international climate scientists published by campaign group Global Witness found that prominent scientists were the most likely to face abuse, with half of those who had published at least 10 papers reporting they had suffered online harassment as a result of their climate work.”

Darren Wolfe had made multiple harassing posts on my page. In addition, Darren had posted a call for others to harass me on his page:

Sidd said:
Mostly I just shut up… if the weather outside their windows don’t convince them, I got no time for this.

Darren Wolfe said:
Ja wohl Herr Gestapoman! You really need a shrink. I’m merely trying to have a discussion with you. Are you really so weak and insecure that you can’t handle respectful disagreement? I will cease and desist because I’m tired of your dogma. You win and freedom of speech loses. I hope you’re happy now.

Ken V Kaplan:
Darren Wolfe, you are a poster boy for this quote. No amount of reason or evidence means anything to you. None of the periods you spoke of were Global and none registered the hottest month basically since Homo Sapians has been on the planet. If you think this is just a “natural cycle” that won’t intensify, you’re nuts.

“There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that ‘my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.” Isaac Asimov

Fortunately dangerous fools like you will not be driving policy or the discussions on this.

Opinions don’t change people, events do. Climate Change is bringing everyone to their needs, even deep deniers like him. I saw this coming, as many did, years ago. Now we are in it. It will get worse before it gets better.

Sidd said:
Mostly I just shut up… if the weather outside their windows don’t convince them, I got no time for this.

Ken V Kaplan responded:
Daniel Brouse, the problem is they do not respond to facts or evidence. It’s both an emotional and identity issue with them, similar to a religion. This why he gave you a bogus study (1600 scientists sre against CC) when the actual data breakdown says it is not true. This is similar to arguments I had with mask, virus and vaccine deniers who refused to accept the science or empirical evidence of massk-vaccine efficacy, and pushed psuedo research and outright lies.

There have been extensive studies to show that many or most of these people process through the amygdala (emotional center) rather than the frontal cortex (seat of rational thought). This is why culture wars for conservatives have been so successful.

This is like trying to convince a Creationist in Evolutionary theory. Fortunately, (or unfortunately) the ongoing and intensifying climate crisis is waking up the majority of people, especially young people. I believe (belated) action will occur but barring an engineering miracle, we are in for much rougher times.

I do think that in a formal and somewhat legal sense, preparing this material is important because there will be venues more significant than social media and those like these two are “poster boys” for denialism that is significant to highlight. They represent and express attitudes, misrepresentation and deflection of higher ups in the food chain, including GOP Presidential candidates.

I responded:
Ken, true, but so sad. You are correct on “This is why culture wars for conservatives have been so successful.” That is why I am making him the poster child on our next paper:
Climate Denial Part I: A Climate Denier Making a “False Narrative” Political Stand

People often ask why I am so tolerant of climate deniers… why don’t I just delete or block them?
1) I always hold out hope that education will help the ignorant.
2) We are followed by about 300,000,000 climate scientists and warriors. They use our case studies in their own day-to-day combat with climate denying idiots.

What you can do today. How to save the planet.

The Human Induced Climate Change Experiment

Climate Denial Part II: Freedom of Speech

Posted on 2023/09/072023/09/07 by admin

by Daniel Brouse
Climate Scientist

Climate Denial Part I: A Climate Denier Making a “False Narrative” Political Stand

Climate Denial Part II: Freedom of Speech, Authority, and Regulation

According to an analysis from the Center for American Progress, there are still 139 Republicans in the 117th Congress, including 109 representatives and 30 senators, who refuse to acknowledge the scientific evidence of human-caused climate change. All 139 of these climate-denying Republicans have made recent statements casting doubt on the clear, established scientific consensus that the world is warming—and that human activity is to blame. These same 139 climate-denying Republicans have received more than $61 million in lifetime contributions from the coal, oil, and gas industries.

Michael Bierly asked:
which is worse — the gop denying it or the dems accepting it verbally yet doing nothing about it?

I responded:
Both are equally responsible for this part: “In the spring of 2023, the USA suspended their national debt ceiling. Included in the debt ceiling suspension is a provision for unlimited emergency federal spending. The result is the government can continue to ignore the causes of climate change and instead give trillion-dollar subsidies to the fossil fuel industry through emergency disaster relief. Yes, another vicious circle — more fossil fuels subsidies result in more climate catastrophes resulting in more fossil fuel subsidies, etc. The end result will be additional trillions in government borrowing while the standard of living declines.” — Daniel Brouse

After I asked Darren Wolfe to stop posting climate denial lies on my page, Darren replied:
I guess I’m the world’s first authoritarian libertarian. Anyway, I’m not the one threatening legal action to silence a different POV. Who is the authoritarian now?

Let me repackage what I’ve already posted. Do agree that the Earth goes through natural warming and cooling cycles that have nothing to do with CO2 emissions?

I replied:
No. Not during the existence of humans has the Earth warmed to the levels of July 2023. That’s why I asked you to read my peer reviewed research. You also need to learn the difference between your opinion/point of view and facts. I’m not trying to silence your point of view. I’m trying to silence your dangerous and inaccurate information. What you are doing is equivalent to telling people to ignore the fire alarm in a crowded theater during a fire. So, back to your good question. No. The Earth has never been through a warming cycle like the one caused by burning fossil fuels.

Darren Wolfe:
Ja wohl Herr Gestapoman! You really need a shrink. I’m merely trying to have a discussion with you. Are you really so weak and insecure that you can’t handle respectful disagreement? I will cease and desist because I’m tired of your dogma. You win and freedom of speech loses. I hope you’re happy now.

Daniel Brouse:
No. Freedom of speech wins! Liars lose. This is not a respectful disagreement… this has been an ignoramus making a “false narrative” political stand on a climate scientist’s page.

Oliver Kocher said:
I find there certainly isn’t scientific consensus about catastrophic, human caused climate change, it’s just that those who don’t agree with the agenda are minimized and have their voices silenced. And besides, the idea of “consensus” being the right thing to go by is sketchy at best. Remember when the Copernican theory of the solar system was “consensus” and people were jailed or worse for disagreeing? Or as a more recent example, COVID 19. Consensus certainly wasn’t a sure thing on that, but those who disagreed were threatened, cancelled, and silenced, just to find out a year later that many of them were right, and their very valid concerns were often at least partially correct. So, your claim of consensus is a logical fallacy of “appeal to authority.”

I replied:
Sorry to say, but you are wrong. When you disagree with facts you are not exercising freedom of speech. You are committing fraud or libel. Science has nothing to do with consensus. 1 = 1. Nevertheless, there is also consensus: “A 2021 report by Cornell University found that 99.9% of more than 88,000 climate change studies agree that humans have accelerated the phenomenon, largely due to carbon emissions.” It’s when you use fraudulent consensus like Darren did (in Part I) that you get yourself into legal trouble.

Ken V Kaplan added:
Oliver Kocher, it’s people like you who put people like them in Congress. To compare Copernican theory with CC denial is preposterous. The empirical evidence is incontrovertible that over 90% of Covid deaths once vaccines were introduced (hundreds of thousands) were among the unvaccinated.
Look the frack around and wake up. You live in a developed country that relies on air conditioning. Others aren’t so lucky. People got third degree burns in AZ from the pavement. The new normal is once in a 100 year disasters are now common. And it will get worse.

Oliver Kocher:
So consensus that agrees with you is right, but consensus that disagrees with you is “fraudulent.” Got it. That’s awfully convenient.

Ken V Kaplan:
Oliver Kocher, there is no actual consensus against CC except for deep deniers about man made CC. Your stement is an example of “false equivalence.” Daniel is an expert in this field. What are your credentials?
BTW, look around. What the hell do you think is happening? 100-500 year occurances are now yearly, on every front, hurricanes, fires, droughts, floods, you name it.
People in AZ got frigging third degree burns from the pavement. Without AC the state would be uninhabitable. You can’t get insurance in Fla.
This is just the beginning.

Daniel Brouse:
Oliver Kocher, no. That’s not what I said. I said my research is not based on consensus… our team are the originators of the hypothesis. Since that time we have gone on to prove our hypothesis, as well as, get 80,000 studies to confirm our results. Now our hypothesis has become theory. That means it is fact. It has nothing to do with consensus. Another fact is people need education about politics, economics, and science. Normally this problem would be only of concern to the individual; however, when people spread dangerous, deadly misinformation, it becomes my concern.

Oliver Kocher:
Daniel Brouse, ok. How am I an authoritarian libertarian? That doesn’t even make sense.
In addition, I do not deny that the climate is changing. I question whether that change is caused by human activity, and more specifically, if it is, whether the impact of the US is sufficient to change the course of said climate change. It is part of the nature of climate to change, so no, I’m not a climate change denier, I’m just skeptical of the alleged cause and theorized effects of it.

Daniel Brouse:
An authoritarian libertarian means you insist on your opinion of “freedom of speech”. You are not free to make false scientific claims. I’m not saying you have, but Darren has. You are allowed to say that you are skeptical of whatever you believe. However, if your opinion is wrong about a fact… expressing that opinion makes you a liar, at best.

“Our team are the originators of the hypothesis. Since that time we have gone on to prove our hypothesis, as well as, get 80,000 studies to confirm our results. Now our hypothesis has become theory. That means it is fact.” If you are skeptical of the facts I have presented (and are supported by over 80,000 independent studies), then prove me wrong with your own scientific study. Otherwise, you should learn these new facts… new to you.

FACT: Human induced climate change is an exponential component of an unordered system (chaos theory). That means global warming is accelerating at a rapid rate in a complex way.

What you can do today. How to save the planet.

The Human Induced Climate Change Experiment

Climate Denial and Climate Change Change

Posted on 2018/02/272018/02/27 by admin

The North Pole saw record high temperatures for February during 2018.

Reuters reported:
Temperatures may have soared as high as 35 degrees Fahrenheit (2 degrees Celsius) at the pole, according to the U.S. Global Forecast System model. While there are no direct measurements of temperature there, Zack Labe, a climate scientist working on his PhD at the University of California at Irvine, confirmed that several independent analyses showed “it was very close to freezing,” which is more than 50 degrees (30 degrees Celsius) above normal.

The warm intrusion penetrated right through the heart of the Central Arctic, Labe said. The temperature averaged for the entire region north of 80 degrees latitude spiked to its highest level ever recorded in February. The average temperature was more than 36 degrees (20 degrees Celsius) above normal. “No other warm intrusions were very close to this,” Labe said in an interview, describing a data set maintained by the Danish Meteorological Institute that dates back to 1958. “I was taken by surprise how expansive this warm intrusion was.”

Climate scientist Sidd Mukherjee added, “Yes. Even more scarily — the fast ice north of Greenland is gone. That was some of the oldest ice left. It hasn’t melted, just been blown away and drifted away with the currents.” (see “Talk about unprecedented“)

An article in Rolling Stone about climate migrations quotes Solomon Hsiang:
Hsiang has many good papers outAn article in Rolling Stone about climate migrations quotes Solomon Hsiang:
“Most people don’t realize how much climate affects everything, from their property values to how hard people work,” says Solomon Hsiang, a professor of public policy at the University of California, Berkeley, who led a recent study that predicts, as the climate warms, there will be “a large transfer of value northward and westward.” And the wealthy, who can afford to adapt, will benefit, while the poor, who will likely be left behind, will suffer. “If we continue on the current path,” Hsiang says, “our analysis suggests that climate change may result in the largest transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich in the country’s history.”

Dr. Mukherjee replied, “But for city officials in at-risk cities, homeowners like Brown are terrifying. “Once people start thinking about the long-term value of their homes and how they will be impacted by climate change, that changes the game completely,” a county attorney in Florida says. What happens to the value of a house in, for instance, Fort Lauderdale, when the cost of flood insurance triples? “When I think about the future of South Florida, it’s flood insurance that scares me the most,” Wayne Pathman, a prominent Miami lawyer and board member of Miami Beach’s chamber of commerce, tells me. Many officials fear a climate-driven exodus that pushes down property values, which in turn reduces property-tax revenues, which are central to funding city services like police and teachers, not to mention road repair and infrastructure maintenance, at precisely the moment when the city needs to spend more to adapt to climate change.

Flooding in downtown Miami after Hurricane Irma in September 2017. Kadir van Lohuizen/NOOR/Redux

It’s a downward spiral for real estate that’s very hard to reverse. “It’s just like the dynamic in the stock market,” says U.C. Berkeley’s Hsiang. “The longer you hold on, the more you have to lose.” And, in many cases, the regions of the country where climate-change denial is strongest, such as the Southeast, are exactly the regions where residents have the most to lose. “In many places, climate denial is going to turn out to have big economic consequences,” Hsiang says.
[Hsiang has many good papers out]

WARNING: Do not buy real estate on or near floodplain.

From The Human Induced Climate Change Experiment