http://twitchy.com/dougp/2023/08/09/researcher-and-ex-climate-change-alarmist-tells-john-stossel-how-the-science-is-corrupted-n2386122
Yesterday the Biden White House wanted to sound the alarm again about the existential threat that is posed by the burning of fossil fuels. How did they do that? By firing up Air Force One and having President Biden head to the Grand Canyon to explain how this administration is trying to "save the planet" (if anything they're doing precisely the opposite).
Yeah ... Brandon is trying to save all of the ironic animals of the Grand Canyon.
Biden then sat down for a super-challenging interview with ... The Weather Channel. Biden was not asked about the Weather Channel's founder's thoughts about climate change.
Brandon sat down for an interview with THE. WEATHER. CHANNEL. REALLY???!!! ROTFLMAO!
Katie Pavlich (@KatiePavlich) ~ Just a reminder that the late John Coleman, a co-founder of the Weather Channel, correctly thought "Climate Change"/global warming was a hoax.
On this same topic, John Stossel has a great interview with a researcher and former climate change alarmist who addressed the "consensus of scientists" argument often used by the likes of Al Gore, John Kerry, and the rest.
Watch:
John Stossel (@JohnStossel) ~ The media insist a “scientific consensus” says climate change is a manmade crisis.
“It’s a manufactured consensus,” researcher @curryja tells me.
Curry knows—she once spread alarm about climate change.
Now she reveals the nefarious ways “the science” is corrupted.
http://twitter.com/i/status/1688935346711773184
Researchers and scientists aren't heard from on mainstream outlets because they're ignored and attacked, not because they don't exist:
John Stossel (@JohnStossel) ~ Scientist @curryja published research that fueled climate change alarmism.
“I was ... treated like a rock star."
Then she realized some of her research was wrong.
When she admitted it, the corrupt climate change industry attacked her.
Here she exposes how alarmism is REWARDED:
http://twitter.com/i/status/1689026447057260545
None of this will be too surprising to our regular readers but it's still incredible to hear about the dishonesty in much of the "science" community ("follow the money" as usual).
shovas (@shovas) ~ "The consensus is so strong there shouldn't even be a debate."
It's when they start saying stuff like this that you know with the highest certainty that you need serious, vigorous debate.
Science IS all about constant and continuous debate.
Author Michael Crichton nailed it years ago: "Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus. There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period."
| 
