Climate scientists - there are plenty of them out there being ignored or disregarded by mainstream media

[neil]

I was listening to Mark Levin's radio show last night (well, it was more like surveillance or monitoring of enemy transmissions LOL), and at one point he asked something to the effect of why there aren't any actual scientists talking about climate change, or global warming.

The fact is that there are plenty of actual scientists talking about climate change/global warming. Here are just a few examples of Youtube videos of scientists that you can actually see and hear directly from themselves doing presentations about, or discussing, climate science/global warming & there's much more on Youtube than these few examples, and there are many more actual scientists than that:

Richard Lindzen - PhD (Harvard University); MIT professor:





Willie Soon - PhD (USC); research scientist:





Judith Curry - PhD (University of Chicago); Georgia Institute of Technology professor:




Freeman Dyson - Cornell University professor:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiKfWdXXfIs


Roy Spencer - PhD (University of Wisconsin); research scientist:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZz_e946ITU


William Happer - PhD & professor (Princeton University); JASON advisory group member:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-9UlF8hkhs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Lye5liWuZw


Bob Carter - PhD (University of Cambridge); James Cook University professor:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRCISn1KfKQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NinRn5faU4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uh20cnLwCiw


Ivar Giaever - PhD & professor (Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCy_UOjEir0


Patrick Moore - PhD (University of British Columbia):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lX1z_6pvM-Q


John Christy - PhD (University of Illinois); University of Alabama professor:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XltFOh7Cg2U

 

[flogger]

I was listening to Mark Levin's radio show last night (well, it was more like surveillance or monitoring of enemy transmissions LOL), and at one point he asked something to the effect of why there aren't any actual scientists talking about climate change, or global warming.

The fact is that there are plenty of actual scientists talking about climate change/global warming. Here are just a few examples of Youtube videos of scientists that you can actually see and hear directly from themselves doing presentations about, or discussing, climate science/global warming & there's much more on Youtube than these few examples, and there are many more actual scientists than that:

Richard Lindzen - PhD (Harvard University); MIT professor:





Willie Soon - PhD (USC); research scientist:





Judith Curry - PhD (University of Chicago); Georgia Institute of Technology professor:




Freeman Dyson - Cornell University professor:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiKfWdXXfIs


Roy Spencer - PhD (University of Wisconsin); research scientist:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZz_e946ITU


William Happer - PhD & professor (Princeton University); JASON advisory group member:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-9UlF8hkhs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Lye5liWuZw


Bob Carter - PhD (University of Cambridge); James Cook University professor:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRCISn1KfKQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NinRn5faU4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uh20cnLwCiw


Ivar Giaever - PhD & professor (Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCy_UOjEir0


Patrick Moore - PhD (University of British Columbia):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lX1z_6pvM-Q


John Christy - PhD (University of Illinois); University of Alabama professor:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XltFOh7Cg2U

Yes but they are all just shills for fossil fuel megacorps

Sadly for a lot of legitimate climate scientists today if they go 'off message' they risk their funding and careers if they were to call out this scam for what it is. Theres now simply too much money, politics and vested interests involved now for their courageous voices to be heard ($2.3 Trillion this year and more next). Often its the retired and most eminent climate scientists uncorrupted by the current highly lucrative narrative that are the most free to speak about what total BS this all is and thank you for highlighting some of them here

Needless to say ridicule death threats and reputational smearing is often what follows their challange to the pervasive non scientific/non factual narrative

 

[Nickyjo]

Yes but they are all just shills for fossil fuel megacorps

Sadly for a lot of legitimate climate scientists today if they go 'off message' they risk their funding and careers if they were to call out this scam for what it is. Theres now simply too much money, politics and vested interests involved now for their courageous voices to be heard ($2.3 Trillion this year and more next). Often its the retired and most eminent climate scientists uncorrupted by the current highly lucrative narrative that are the most free to speak about what total BS this all is and thank you for highlighting some of them here

No offense intended, but how do you know that these folks are shills for fossil fuel companies? (I am assuming that they are skeptics, couldn't get the links to open.) For me, a greater test is why they haven't approached Congress or the IPCC to testify, whether they have submitted peer reviewed articles to the appropriate journals, etc.

 

[Phys251]

I was listening to Mark Levin's radio show last night (well, it was more like surveillance or monitoring of enemy transmissions LOL), and at one point he asked something to the effect of why there aren't any actual scientists talking about climate change, or global warming.

The fact is that there are plenty of actual scientists talking about climate change/global warming. Here are just a few examples of Youtube videos of scientists that you can actually see and hear directly from themselves doing presentations about, or discussing, climate science/global warming & there's much more on Youtube than these few examples, and there are many more actual scientists than that:

Richard Lindzen - PhD (Harvard University); MIT professor:





Willie Soon - PhD (USC); research scientist:





Judith Curry - PhD (University of Chicago); Georgia Institute of Technology professor:




Freeman Dyson - Cornell University professor:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiKfWdXXfIs


Roy Spencer - PhD (University of Wisconsin); research scientist:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZz_e946ITU


William Happer - PhD & professor (Princeton University); JASON advisory group member:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-9UlF8hkhs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Lye5liWuZw


Bob Carter - PhD (University of Cambridge); James Cook University professor:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRCISn1KfKQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NinRn5faU4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uh20cnLwCiw


Ivar Giaever - PhD & professor (Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCy_UOjEir0


Patrick Moore - PhD (University of British Columbia):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lX1z_6pvM-Q


John Christy - PhD (University of Illinois); University of Alabama professor:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XltFOh7Cg2U

YouTube links? Not links to their research, which may or may not be in climate science?

 

[dmpi]

Nobody works for free. EVERY climate scientist on both sides is paid by someone. The sad thing is if you're a electrical engineer, computer scientist, mathematician, etc you can work for anybody and make a good living, but if you're a climate 'scientist' then you have to part of this political mess becuase that's all the work that's out there.

 

[OrphanSlug]

The main issue is people are tired of alarmist predictions, followed by some sort of suggested action that results in far more costs and far more restrictions, and watching the political elite get to tap dance around all of those actions.

 

[Sabre]

In 1970, Sen. Gaylord Nelson, D-Wisc., – often considered the “father of Earth Day” – cited the secretary of the Smithsonian, who “believes that in 25 years, somewhere between 75 and 80 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct.”

In 1982, U.N. official Mostafa Tolba, executive director of the UN Environment Program, warned:
“By the turn of the century, an environmental catastrophe will witness devastation as complete, as irreversible, as any nuclear holocaust.”

In 1989, the Associated Press relayed a warning from a U.N. official:
"A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000."

Scientist Harrison Brown predicted in Scientific American that lead, zinc, tin, gold and silver deposits would be fully depleted before 1990.

University of California at Davis professor Kenneth Watt, who warned that present trends would make the world “eleven degrees colder in the year 2000 ... about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.”

In 2006, while promoting his movie “An Inconvenient Truth”, Al Gore said that humanity had only 10 years left before the world would reach a point of no return.

2019
‘The world is gonna end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change and your biggest issue is how are we gonna pay for it?'” Ocasio-Cortez said. A few months later she repeated the claim again.

 

[longview]

No offense intended, but how do you know that these folks are shills for fossil fuel companies? (I am assuming that they are skeptics, couldn't get the links to open.) For me, a greater test is why they haven't approached Congress or the IPCC to testify, whether they have submitted peer reviewed articles to the appropriate journals, etc.

Most have testified before congress and all are published. It does not matter if the results of their research does not predict catastrophe, the IPCC is not that interested.

 

[HIP56948]

Society is a lousy handicapper. Don't do anything and nothing happens = lose money. Don't do anything and something happens = You die.

 

[Lord of Planar]

No offense intended, but how do you know that these folks are shills for fossil fuel companies? (I am assuming that they are skeptics, couldn't get the links to open.)

I think his point was that is the narrative the AGW agenda driven people claim about their opponents.

For me, a greater test is why they haven't approached Congress or the IPCC to testify, whether they have submitted peer reviewed articles to the appropriate journals, etc.

Some have been before congress. Judith Curry shammed Michale Mann some years back in front of congress.

 

[Bergslagstroll]

Nobody works for free. EVERY climate scientist on both sides is paid by someone. The sad thing is if you're a electrical engineer, computer scientist, mathematician, etc you can work for anybody and make a good living, but if you're a climate 'scientist' then you have to part of this political mess becuase that's all the work that's out there.

Both Trump and Republicans in Congress denies the need for action on climate change. Still this report was published by thirteen federal agencies in 2018, when Republicans controlled both the White House, the Senate and the House of Representative. Because the evidence for the urgent need for action is so overwhelming.

"The impacts of climate change are already being felt in communities across the country. More frequent and intense extreme weather and climate-related events, as well as changes in average climate conditions, are expected to continue to damage infrastructure, ecosystems, and social systems that provide essential benefits to communities. Future climate change is expected to further disrupt many areas of life, exacerbating existing challenges to prosperity posed by aging and deteriorating infrastructure, stressed ecosystems, and economic inequality. Impacts within and across regions will not be distributed equally. People who are already vulnerable, including lower-income and other marginalized communities, have lower capacity to prepare for and cope with extreme weather and climate-related events and are expected to experience greater impacts. Prioritizing adaptation actions for the most vulnerable populations would contribute to a more equitable future within and across communities. Global action to significantly cut greenhouse gas emissions can substantially reduce climate-related risks and increase opportunities for these populations in the longer term."

Fourth National Climate Assessment: Summary Findings

This report is an authoritative assessment of the science of climate change, with a focus on the United States. It represents the second of two volumes of the Fourth National Climate Assessment, mandated by the Global Change Research Act of 1990.

nca2018.globalchange.gov

Also fossil fuel companies have spend massive amount of money on propaganda and PR to delay the transition away from fossil fuels. That at the same time they need to employ climate scientists to predict if climate change will impact their operations. That they for example have operations off shore, on the coastline and other areas that is under a lot of impact from the weather. There the result is that they have to publicly support the Paris Accord because the evidence is so overwhelming.

How the oil industry made us doubt climate change

Energy companies stand accused of trying to downplay their contribution to global warming.

www.bbc.com

Fossil fuel political giving outdistances renewables 13 to one » Yale Climate Connections

During the latest midterm election cycle, the fossil fuel industry paid at least $359 million for federal campaign donations and lobbying.

yaleclimateconnections.org

ExxonMobil Corporation | ExxonMobil

ExxonMobil scientists are pioneering new research & technologies to reduce emissions. Learn how we are responsibly meeting the world's energy needs.

energyfactor.exxonmobil.com

 

[Bergslagstroll]

The problem is instead that the media have given to much coverage to climate denying scientists, there many times those deniers are being was funded by the fossil fuel industry. There this is a reason for why action on climate change have been delayed for so long.

"A new analysis of the media landscape shows that from 2000 to 2016, climate deniers received far more media attention than scientists. In fact, during this time, media outlets gave these contrarians nearly 50 percent more visibility than the top experts on climate change.

"Climate change contrarians have successfully organised a strong voice within politics and science communication," the authors of the study write."

That the media ignored the fact only few studies refuted the need for action and those studies was not only filled with errors but also contradicted each other.

"In an article for the Guardian, one of the researchers, Dana Nuccitelli points out another red flag with the climate-change-denying papers: “There is no cohesive, consistent alternative theory to human-caused global warming,” he writes. “Some blame global warming on the sun, others on orbital cycles of other planets, others on ocean cycles, and so on. There is a 97% expert consensus on a cohesive theory that’s overwhelmingly supported by the scientific evidence, but the 2–3% of papers that reject that consensus are all over the map, even contradicting each other.”"

Those 3% of scientific papers that deny climate change? A review found them all flawed

Scientists who deny climate change are not modern-day Galileos.

qz.com

While the evidence for the urgent need for action is so overwhelming that all the world's leading scientific sociteis acknowledge the urgent need for action. LIke for example these 31 American.

Thirty-one top scientific societies speak with one voice on global climate change – The Ecological Society of America

www.esa.org

 

[PoS]

Most have testified before congress and all are published. It does not matter if the results of their research does not predict catastrophe, the IPCC is not that interested.

Neither is the MSM. If you look at CNN, the Guardian, Newsweek, and the BBC, everything they publish on climate change is alarmist, and they have at least one article out every day.

 

[RetiredUSN]

YouTube links? Not links to their research, which may or may not be in climate science?

Like the thousands of other scientists that the GW alarmists consensus lovers go on about?

How many of them are actually in the GW field?

 

[flogger]

No offense intended, but how do you know that these folks are shills for fossil fuel companies? (I am assuming that they are skeptics, couldn't get the links to open.)

Ever heard of sarcasm or is it just a British thing ?

 

[Lord of Planar]

Like the thousands of other scientists that the GW alarmists consensus lovers go on about?

How many of them are actually in the GW field?

The ones in the YouTube links do study the climate sciences.

There is no such thing as "GW Field."

What is amazing, is the AGW indoictrinated will call Judith Curry a denier. Everyone who does is a complete fool. She agrees warming is happening and is an issue. She just disagrees with the scare tactics and exposes the politics influences. She is a00% in the camp that we impact the earth, yet because she doesn't go into alarmist mode, she is called a denier by others.

 

[Nickyjo]

Ever heard of sarcasm or is it just a British thing ?

Sorry. The has been evidence of some fossil fuel companies funding spokespersons to increase skepticism about the theory, tho when I check some oil company websites they seem to accept the science.

 

[flogger]

Sorry. The has been evidence of some fossil fuel companies funding spokespersons to increase skepticism about the theory, tho when I check some oil company websites they seem to accept the science.

There has never been much actual 'science' involved in this whole agenda sadly

We can no more control the climate than we can the tides and the seasons. It was always about controlling humans though and the stupendous cash it has generated to date for the elites promoting it through its exploitation of indoctrinated fear and encouragement of ignorance.

Which means it won't be going away any time soon

 

[Nickyjo]

There has never been much actual 'science' involved in this whole agenda sadly

We can no more control the climate than we can the tides and the seasons. It was always about controlling humans though and the stupendous cash it has generated to date for the elites promoting it through its exploitation of indoctrinated fear and encouragement of ignorance.

Which means it won't be going away any time soon

Oh, c'mon. Industry attacked Ralph Nader, tried to cover up the dangers of tobacco and smog. That's what they do, and it's hard to blame them in a free-market society. We figured out how to diminish smog, and LA's air is cleaner.Now it seems that even oil companies have come to accept the climate science. Face it: whenever a particular environmental issue arises, it is natural that businesses which will profit from ignoring it or minimizing it to do so. Do you think employers were part of the vanguard opposing child labor, the seven day work week? Years ago, I spoke to farmworkers who remembered being sprayed with pesticides from airplanes while they worked. Naturally, they were told by their employers not to worry about it, even as they were getting sick. Capitalism is an extraordinarily creative and productive system. But it's very exaltation of self-interest has a dark side, corresponding to its good side. That's why we have regulated it for several decades.

 

[noonereal]

I was listening to Mark Levin's radio show last night

Enough said.

I simply can't belive that in this time of enlightenment people would ignore the wonders of our modern Renaissance and listen to folks like Mark Levin.

That is ****ed up.

 

[vegas giants]

I was listening to Mark Levin's radio show last night (well, it was more like surveillance or monitoring of enemy transmissions LOL), and at one point he asked something to the effect of why there aren't any actual scientists talking about climate change, or global warming.

The fact is that there are plenty of actual scientists talking about climate change/global warming. Here are just a few examples of Youtube videos of scientists that you can actually see and hear directly from themselves doing presentations about, or discussing, climate science/global warming & there's much more on Youtube than these few examples, and there are many more actual scientists than that:

Richard Lindzen - PhD (Harvard University); MIT professor:





Willie Soon - PhD (USC); research scientist:





Judith Curry - PhD (University of Chicago); Georgia Institute of Technology professor:




Freeman Dyson - Cornell University professor:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiKfWdXXfIs


Roy Spencer - PhD (University of Wisconsin); research scientist:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZz_e946ITU


William Happer - PhD & professor (Princeton University); JASON advisory group member:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-9UlF8hkhs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Lye5liWuZw


Bob Carter - PhD (University of Cambridge); James Cook University professor:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRCISn1KfKQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NinRn5faU4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uh20cnLwCiw


Ivar Giaever - PhD & professor (Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCy_UOjEir0


Patrick Moore - PhD (University of British Columbia):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lX1z_6pvM-Q


John Christy - PhD (University of Illinois); University of Alabama professor:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XltFOh7Cg2U

None of these people are ignored


They are very well publicized and funded

 

[vegas giants]

There has never been much actual 'science' involved in this whole agenda sadly

We can no more control the climate than we can the tides and the seasons. It was always about controlling humans though and the stupendous cash it has generated to date for the elites promoting it through its exploitation of indoctrinated fear and encouragement of ignorance.

Which means it won't be going away any time soon

Absolutely false

Evidence - NASA Science

Takeaways The rate of change since the mid-20th century is unprecedented over millennia. Earth’s climate has changed throughout history. Just in the last 800,000 years, there have been eight cycles of ice ages and warmer periods, with the end of the last ice age about 11,700 years ago marking...

climate.nasa.gov

 

[noonereal]

Years ago, I spoke to farmworkers who remembered being sprayed with pesticides from airplanes while they worked.

Now you have spoken to two. I was sprayed by a crop duster while working in the fields in 1975.

I also had a pesticide accident out in the fields when I was mixing the chemical with water. That was worse.

 

[watsup]

There has never been much actual 'science' involved in this whole agenda sadly

We can no more control the climate than we can the tides and the seasons. It was always about controlling humans though and the stupendous cash it has generated to date for the elites promoting it through its exploitation of indoctrinated fear and encouragement of ignorance.

Which means it won't be going away any time soon

None of this is true, no matter how often you vomit it.

 

[flogger]

None of this is true, no matter how often you vomit it.

Prove it ?