Greta Thunberg's new grift

When one grift (climate change) ends, Greta Thunberg shifts to another:

CNN is still Climate-Change-Crazy

Extreme weather has been around for millennia, but  CNN is still pushing climate change hysteria. What's interesting is the analyst sharing the details is clearly just coping with the American people finally getting wise to their hype.  He isn't saying people are no longer believing the climate change hype, he's positing that they have given up in the belief that they can no longer do anything to help fight climate change. They are resigned to it being beyond their control, is what he's saying.  

This level of copium is what shows me, CNN at least has not learned their lessons from the Trump win; they are not self-reflecting. They are instead attributing the change to something other than themselves. It can't be them, it's the stupid people. 

It's going to be a long slog to an on-going conservative dominance in politics, but this sort of blinkered view by the likes of CNN can only help their own demise, and the rise of conservative dominance.

Science beaurocracy = junk science

Research papers for the sole purpose of research papers leads to crap (i.e. junk science). Climate change hysteria, COVID hysteria and other future hysterias are an inevitable result of the burgeoning beaurocracy.

Science needs to get back to it's roots; science and innovation.

A little bit of fun

Shocking proof of climate change from the Babylon Bee:

There is no climate emergency

Just a reminder, it's 97% hype:

Polar bears and climate change

Are polar bears suffering from climate change? No:

Climate change caused the earthquake and the eclipse???

I'm not going to add anything to this; not because I can't but because Sunny Hostin from The View, is too stupid to merit any comment:

Bill Gates says the real part out loud

Climate exaggeration is going to become a buzzword now?

Hottest ever. Except not.

Dr. John Robson comments on the claim of the hottest day ever based on computer manipulation of data going back only to 1979. That's not an oops, it's deliberate.

Why "follow the science" makes no sense

The problem with the whole notion of "follow the science" and if you don't your a denier, a luddite, a fascist far-right nazi is that it's wrong.  Science itself is not supposed to follow the science.  The scientific method is to propose a hypothesis and test it.

If we followed the science in the era of Christopher Columbus, we might still think the world was flat.  Science is meant to question itself.  If Albert Einstein didn't think for himself we wouldn't have a more advanced alternative to Newtonian physics.

We HAVE to question the science, not follow it.  Any scientist who thinks otherwise, or says otherwise, any politician who says otherwise, guaranteed, has an agenda; be it climate change, vaccines or whatever else inevitably comes along that ends up getting leveraged for some agenda.

The more you lean into not questioning anything, the more you end up with cognitive bias. That is the point society has reached, prior to the change we are starting to see now. Many people are waking up to reality.  The frog in the slowly boiling pot of water may have finally realized what is happening to it. 

This nine year old, but still highly relevant video, shows the impact of cognitive bias on thought processes and a sure fire way to avoid falling into that trap.

As Bill Burr so comically put it in one of his routines, "how come you can't ask questions"? That's exactly what we should be doing as human beings, always. Otherwise we will all end up as a cog in someone's agenda, and that agenda could be quite nefarious.

There is no climate crisis

Oh, and by the way, possibly no energy transition underway.

Is ChatGPT woke?

ChatGPT is a model-based chatbot cum search engine that does a remarkable job of mimicking human style communication in answering questions posed to it.  Here's the link if you haven't seen it yet. If fed properly posed questions it can provide remarkably well made answers.  Whether ChatGPT and AI (artificial intelligence) are a good idea for humanity is a broader debate, for another time.  There are some specific problems with how the model has been trained and I'll point out one example below regarding climate change.  It appears that the model (or engine or ChatGPT) is woke, at least on this subject.

This, by the way, is not ground-breaking.  Others like Ben Shapiro have already tested it's wokeness on issues and come away at least concerned about it. 

Of course the model is not the issue.  It learns it's responses from the data made available to it.  Garbage in - garbage out.  That's not to say everything it was fed was garbage, but enough of it, on certain subjects, clearly was garbage.  Observe my 'conversation':

Me

Write an article explaining why global warming is not a man-made phenomenon using specific scientific facts.

ChatGPT

 It is a widely accepted scientific fact that the Earth's climate is warming, and that human activity, particularly the burning of fossil fuels, is a major contributor to this warming. However, some argue that global warming is not a man-made phenomenon and that natural factors, such as solar radiation and volcanic activity, play a larger role in the Earth's climate.

One argument is that variations in solar radiation, such as changes in the sun's output of energy, have a greater impact on the Earth's climate than human activity. However, studies have shown that while the sun's radiation does play a role in the Earth's climate, the warming observed in recent decades cannot be explained solely by changes in solar radiation.

Another argument is that volcanic activity is a significant contributor to global warming. Volcanoes release large amounts of greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide and methane, into the atmosphere. However, the amount of greenhouse gases released by volcanoes is significantly less than the amount released by human activity. Additionally, volcanic activity has been shown to have a cooling effect on the Earth's climate in the short term, due to the release of aerosols that reflect sunlight back into space.

It is also true that the Earth's climate has undergone significant changes in the past, long before human activity became a significant factor. However, the rate of warming in recent decades is much faster than any observed in the past, and the overwhelming majority of scientists agree that human activity is the primary cause of this accelerated warming.

In conclusion, while natural factors such as solar radiation and volcanic activity do play a role in the Earth's climate, the evidence overwhelmingly shows that human activity, particularly the burning of fossil fuels, is the primary cause of global warming. It is important to note that scientific facts are supported by scientific evidence and research, and that global warming is a complex issue with various factors influencing it.

Me

Make a counter-argument to your article.

ChatGPT

One counter-argument to the idea that human activity is the primary cause of global warming is that the Earth's climate is constantly changing and that the current warming trend is simply part of a natural cycle. Proponents of this viewpoint argue that the Earth has gone through periods of warming and cooling in the past and that the current warming trend is not unusual or unprecedented. They may also point to the fact that the Earth's temperature has been relatively stable for the last 9000 years and that the current warming trend is not as severe as some of the warming trends that occurred in the past.

Another counter-argument is that the models used to predict future warming are not reliable and that the warming may not be as severe as projected. Some argue that the models used to predict future warming are based on a limited amount of data and are not accurate enough to make definitive predictions about the future climate. They may also argue that the models do not take into account all of the natural factors that influence the Earth's climate, such as changes in solar radiation and volcanic activity.

Additionally, some argue that even if human activity is contributing to global warming, the potential negative impacts of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, such as economic downturns, would outweigh the potential benefits. They may argue that alternative solutions, such as adaptation or geoengineering, should be pursued instead of reducing emissions.

It is important to note that while these counter-arguments do present valid points, the scientific consensus is that human activity is the primary cause of global warming and that immediate action is needed to reduce emissions and mitigate the potential negative impacts of climate change. It is also important to consider that scientific research and facts are constantly evolving and that there are different perspectives on the issue of global warming.

[Emphasis added]

Two tries and ChatGPT tried to steer me towards global warming being a real threat; despite my ask to counter-argue it.

This does not represent a robust line of questioning, and ChatGPT does make errors and recognizes them when you point it out to it's credit (I have witnessed it in an unrelated sports chat I had).  Here's the general issue I have with the woke climate change answers as a specific issue and as a broader generalization.  People will come to ChatGPT for answers, perhaps eventually in greater numbers than Google as a search engine. But they will be unaware of potential garbage-in garbage-out issues and take ChatGPT answers as gospel truth.  This will result in a reinforcing of woke culture, just as woke culture is being pushed back for the first time.

More broadly, existing biases and misinformation will become the new common sense or the "new normal" view with an over-reliance on the tool.  Think Wikipedia issues, but on a much bigger scale.

This is not to say that I am at odds with models and improving what AI can do. I believe that improving predictive modeling, even what has been done with ChatGPT can be very useful. However, it must be done extremely diligently with a lot of forethought.  I have built statistical models during my career. When done properly, it is extremely time consuming to ensure the right data is included to avoid biases, the right type of model is used, the model must be thoroughly tested etc.  There is a lot of work involved. Every model I built required a very large amount of documentation, so it could be reviewed the in future for accuracy and robustness.

ChatGPT is not woke.  It's a model built on web data up to 2021.  If 90% of the web says global warming is real, then ChatGPT will provide answers based on that set of inputs. It is not really artificial intelligence, and neither are any models. They are statistical predictive tools at this point, nothing more.  They will likely advance beyond that at some point, but we are nowhere near that point now.  The real danger is that people may believe we are, and accept erroneous or dubious outputs from the tool as gospel truth, and make decisions accordingly.

Climate Change Peer Reviews

Dr. John Robson and CDN do a great job debunking climate change nonsense and activism. 

Evironmentalist Puppets

Ever wonder why you are protesting climate change, when climate change is the natural order of the world? Who put you up to it? Unwittingly, you are profiting others.

Meanwhile in the Netherlands - a farmer revolt

A farmers' version of the Freedom Convoy in the Netherlands, this in response to crazy climate change policy changes demanded by governments. Different issue, different country, same autocratic governmental actions.

Climate Change is back for useful idiots

The latest effort by the White House is exactly what my next post (later this morning) will be about. 

Lots of asteroids - SJWs beware

Yes, this is a little off topic and mostly irrelevant but then again so is Climate Change.  And wouldn't it be great to get woke SJWs to focus on asteroids rather than the Paris Climate Accords?  Instead of that we need a global initiative on climate defense.  Right? Humanity needs to come together to develop a global defense shield, blah, blah, blah.

In any case, there have been an usual amount of large asteroids passing relatively close to earth this month:

Even Australians understand how bad Joe Biden would be

Joe Biden, climate zealot and China-surrender poster-boy.  This is what president Trump will need to hammer on during the election cycle - how terrible Biden's plan really is.  It will resonate in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and possibly even Michigan.  It's a good tactical message, even if the real argument needs to be about the economy and law and order- two issues Biden is terribly weak on.

If people in Australia recognize this, how hard can it be to get Americans to understand?

Hero climate alarmist gets cancelled for recanting his hysteria

Just watch:



Here's more:

The ethanol scam

You know how they say the road to hell is paved with good intentions?  That seems to be how the ethanol fuel industry got started.  With OPEC making living more expensive for everyone, it seemed like a good idea to use a renewable American resource as an alternative fuel.  And then of course it was supposed to be cleaner and better for climate change. But as is typical, when regulations got involved, it turned into a scam.