As I noted in my previous posts on the East Coast heat wave, the term “heat dome” is part of the language manipulation being embraced by the mainstream media and climate cultists to gin up fear about weather and enforce ecoactivist policies.
For quite some time, I have been taking our language back and countering the global warming inanity by using the term “pseudo-science.” I am grateful to see that a growing number of scientists and analysts have begun to label the theory of human-caused global warming as “pseudo-science.” This perspective enforces the reality that the scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change is not settled, and that the evidence supporting it is flawed or insufficient.
To my profound delight, I have noted that one of the most preeminent scientists in this field is using the term. In a recent interview published on “Watts Up With That” blog, Curry argues that climate science has become “pseudo-science.”
Interviewer: What’s the state of science under these conditions, or climate science in particular?Dr. Judith Curry: It’s not science anymore; it’s become a pseudoscience. You know, the hardcore, physics-based climate dynamics, you know, such as what we had in the 1980s or whatever, I mean, that’s just a small sliver of what we now define as climate science.I mean, what the students are getting their PhDs in—they analyze the output of these climate models, looking for some sort of catastrophe that they can identify and write a paper on, without ever even, you know, critically evaluating these models or how they should be used. I mean, it’s just sort of nonsense, and it’s received so much funding. And also, the journalism has been—you know, like 15 years ago, there were only a handful of journalists who specialized in climate or even the environmental beat, so to speak.Now, you know, until recently, you had, like, 35 people in the climate bureau at a major media outlet, and there were some that were funded by these billionaire donors—Carbon Brief and some of these other things—that were publishing, had huge staffs, and publishing a lot of material, and it was funded by activist donors. It’s not what I would call honest or investigative journalism; it’s journalism that’s designed to advocate for a particular political position.
Curry is a stellar example of scientific bravery. Curry’s skepticism about the magnitude and certainty of human-caused climate change led to her being marginalized by many mainstream climate scientists. She has described herself as being “tossed out of the tribe” within the climate science community, noting that her views made her a pariah at major climate conferences and in academic circles.
She hosts a blog called Climate Etc. that is a wonderful source for thorough and reasoned analysis on all aspects of climate science. In fact, a recently posted article entitled “A Critique of the Apocalyptic Climate Narrative” is a great overview of a work she and coauthor Harry DeAngelo, published in the Journal of Applied Corporate Finance.
The article challenges the prevalent view head-on that asserts climate change poses an imminent existential threat to humanity and that urgent, large-scale suppression of fossil fuels is the only viable policy response. Curry and DeAngelo argue that the current “apocalyptic” narrative is misleading and socially destructive, as it overstates the risks of continued global warming fail to stress the substantial costs and disruptions that rapid fossil fuel reduction would impose on society.
They emphasize that fossil fuels remain essential for producing food (via ammonia-based fertilizers), steel, cement, and plastics, and that eliminating them before viable alternatives are available would significantly reduce quality of life and economic prosperity. In fact, their assertion is confirmed by the recent need for “Clean Energy” Maryland to be rescued by Pennsylvania during the recent heatwave.
Curry and DeAngelo also highlight problems if policy-makers continue to push for a green-energy utopia.
From a capital markets perspective, the current green-investment situation accordingly has elements of a stock-price bubble that is supported by a false narrative. One can expect that bubble to sustain or grow provided that many people continue to buy into the premise of an urgent need to transition away from fossil fuels and as governments add more subsidies to renewable-energy projects.The danger is that the bubble will pop or dissolve as it becomes increasingly clear that the Apocalyptic climate narrative is an extremely effective form of environmentalist propaganda that markedly overstates the risks to humanity of continued global warming.
I am glad to see real climatologists fighting to take climate science back from the cultists. It is my dearest wish the “global warming” madness is eventually deemed a pseudo-science in the same way astrology and phrenology are.
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY