Tags: Climate Change | Global Warming | United Nations | colorado | davis | ipcc | cru

Biased 'Fact-Checkers' Offer Bogus Cover for Facebook Censorship

facebook

(Rvlsoft/Dreamstime)

By Monday, 28 October 2019 09:35 AM Current | Bio | Archive

Last week I received a disturbing e-mail with the following message:

"Larry, I tried to post your excellent article on my Facebook page, but its auto-screener deemed it 'false information' and warned that I could be banished if I posted it with my comments. The evaluators appear to be the usual suspects that feed at grants troughs, where the outcome of 'research' is predetermined – CLIMATEFEEDBACK.ORG."

The person who contacted me was referring to an Oct. 14 article I posted titled "500 Global Climate Scientists Challenge Mob Hysteria."

Having written well more than 600 total online and print editorial articles divided nearly equally between Forbes and Newsmax, the "false information" assessment drew my immediate attention.

I don’t recall ever having to post a factual correction to any of them.

Very briefly recapping the original article, it highlighted eight points presented for consideration in a letter sent to U.N. Secretary General Antonio Guterres, by experienced scientists and professionals in climate and related fields representing 23 countries challenging any scientific or moral basis for prevalent alarm-based proposals:

  • There is no climate emergency. Climate science should be less political in advancing exaggerated predictions, more open in in addressing uncertainties, and more balanced in assessing imagined climate change mitigation costs and benefits.

  • Both natural and human causes influence warming. Earth’s climate has always experienced natural cold and warm phases…most recently a period of warming that ensued following the Little Ice Age in the mid-1800s.

  • Recent warming is far slower than climate models have predicted. This tells us that we remain far from understanding human and other contributions.

  • Climate policy relies on inadequate models. Most tend to exaggerate effects of CO2 and other greenhouse gases, and largely ignore agricultural benefits.

  • CO2 is not a "pollutant." It is essential for photosynthesis . . . the basis for all life.

  • Global warming has not increased either the frequency nor intensity of natural disasters. Any historical fact check will offer statistical confirmation of this fact.

  • Climate and energy policies must respect scientific and economic realities. The net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050 is unrealistic and harmful.

  • An honest climate debate is warranted and overdue.

The original number of petitioners has since grown to more than 700.

A tiny sampling of prominent American signatories includes MIT professor emeritus Dr. Richard Lindzen, Dr. Freeman Dyson at the Princeton Institute of Advanced Studies, Princeton professor emeritus Will Happer, and Stanford University professor emeritus Elliot D. Bloom.

In support of their article censorship decision, Facebook had attached a link to a litany of reviewer assaults on the petitioners’ scientific credentials along with extensive off-topic boiler plate talking points obviously intended to bolster claims to their own superior expertise.

This being the case, only one member of the group stands out as a notable, although hardly objective, climate science and policy authority. Professor Timothy Osborn directs the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (CRU), ground-zero of the Climategate email scandal disaster.

Twila, a University of Colorado, Boulder "research scientist" (rank unspecified) stated concern that “many of those who signed the letter are well known ‘climate deniers’ and are not actively involved in direct climate change and its impacts.”

The term "climate denier" is prejudicially offensive and grossly ignorant.

Amber, a part-time adjunct lecturer of "agricultural sustainability" at the University of California, Davis observed that many of the signers were likely even worse than deniers. She noted that most of the letter signatories were geologists (19%) and engineers (21%), "many of whom were implicitly or explicitly involved in fossil energy extraction."

Amber dismissed "most of the rest" as merely "physicists, chemists, and mathematicians."

Conflating authentic science with gender and age factors, Amber reported that 95% of the signers were men, and were "skewed heavily towards the older generation – for example, there were 79 emeritus professors on the list (16% of the total)."

In other words, don’t trust old distinguished and experienced guys who aren’t seeking science grants and promotions.

Victor, a scientist of unstated rank at the University of Bonn, Germany stated that "next to the political opinions expressed [in the letter], every single sentence is either wrong, insignificant or irrelevant."

At least Amber disagreed with Victor on this: Each of the six claims [there are actually eight] has some element of truth to it (e.g. there is not much evidence that global warming is already making hurricanes more frequent)."

So finally, why would more than 700 scientists and related professionals petition the United Nations to reconsider what they regard to be unsound and destructive climate alarm-driven energy policies?

Perhaps it has a lot to do with candid advice offered by former United Nations IPCC Mitigation of Climate Change working group co-chair Ottamar Edenhoffer.

Speaking in November of 2010, he advised that, " . . . one has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. Instead, climate change policy is about how we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth . . . "

Maybe that’s also a very good reason for all of us to resist unwarranted climate fear-and-guilt-based socialistic infringements upon our rights and responsibilities to say so.

Larry Bell is an endowed professor of space architecture at the University of Houston where he founded the Sasakawa International Center for Space Architecture (SICSA) and the graduate program in space architecture. He is the author of several books, including “The Weaponization of AI and the Internet: How Global Networks of Infotech Overlords are Expanding Their Control Over Our Lives” (2019), "Reinventing Ourselves: How Technology is Rapidly and Radically Transforming Humanity" (2019), "Thinking Whole: Rejecting Half-Witted Left & Right Brain Limitations" (2018), "Reflections on Oceans and Puddles: One Hundred Reasons to be Enthusiastic, Grateful and Hopeful” (2017), "Cosmic Musings: Contemplating Life Beyond Self" (2016), "Scared Witless: Prophets and Profits of Climate Doom" (2015) and “Climate of Corruption: Politics and Power Behind the Global Warming Hoax” (2011). He is currently working on a new book with Buzz Aldrin, "Beyond Footprints and Flagpoles." To read more of his reports Click Here Now.
 

© 2020 Newsmax. All rights reserved.


   
1Like our page
2Share
LarryBell
In support of their article censorship decision, Facebook had attached a link to a litany of reviewer assaults on the petitioners’ scientific credentials along with extensive off-topic boiler plate talking points obviously intended to bolster claims to their own superior expertise.
colorado, davis, ipcc, cru
1004
2019-35-28
Monday, 28 October 2019 09:35 AM
Newsmax Media, Inc.
 

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

NEWSMAX.COM
America's News Page
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved