by K. Haapala,  WUWT, Nov 25, 2024

Scope: This Week begins with Richard Lindzen’s discussion on recent political movements that falsely claim to be based on science. Vijay Jayaraj discusses a conference of important nations that the legacy media missed, or misrepresented. Delancyplace.com discusses a few issues in Fooled by Randomness by Nassim Nicholas Taleb. Roy Spencer and John Christy discuss corrections needed to the measurements by satellites when the satellites drift too far from the planned orbit. Owen Klinsky alerts the US to the Winter Reliability Assessment by North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC). Roger Caiazza continues to express concern over New York’s future reliance on Dispatchable Emissions-Free Resources (DEFR), that appears imaginary. A brief discussion on a Bomb Cyclone concludes this Week.

Rumors State: Some of the most misleading arguments for drastic action to “combat climate change” include phrases such as “The Science says.” Science says nothing; in physical science it is the physical evidence that reveals the validity of a claim. Writing in the American Mind, MIT Professor emeritus of Atmospheric Science Richard Lindzen reveals “How a political movement invented its own scientific basis.” He begins with:

“Modern political movements have frequently laid claim to being based in science, from immigration restriction and eugenics (in the U.S. after WWI), to antisemitism and race ideology (in Hitler’s Germany), to Communism and Lysenkoism (under Stalin). Each of these falsely invoked a scientific consensus that convinced highly educated citizens, who were nonetheless ignorant of science, to set aside the anxieties associated with their ignorance. Since all scientists supposedly agreed, there was no need for them to understand the science.

Of course, this version of “the science” is the opposite of science itself. Science is a mode of inquiry rather than a source of authority. However, the success that science achieves has earned it a measure of authority in the public’s mind. This is what politicians frequently envy and exploit.

The climate panic fits into this same pattern and, as in all the preceding cases, science is in fact irrelevant. At best, it is a distraction which has led many of us to focus on the numerous misrepresentations of science entailed in what was purely a political movement.”

…