Vilifying climate heretics remains socially acceptable.
Scientists score lower than chimpanzees when quizzed about basic, state-of-the-world facts.
When someone’s won a Nobel Prize, who cares how long they served in Cabinet?
The fairy tale about Nobel laureate climate experts demonstrates that just because you hear it on the BBC or read it in The New York Times doesn’t mean it’s true.
A new book appears to be a rehash of 40-year-old environmental scaremongering endorsed by that era’s men of science.
Eminent individuals are urging US educators to encourage a genuine campus debate about fossil fuels.
A Nobel laureate says people who question climate dogma deserve to be “punished in the afterlife.”
An opinion piece in Scientific America alleges that, over the long term, a great deal of scientific research turns out not to be true. Independent replication of research findings is apparently far less common than we think.
Rather than championing logic and reason, the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences now stages political theatre. Humanity is accused, tried, and convicted in a “court case” in which the verdict was determined in advance.
When newspaper clippings are cited as evidence in the climate bible, when there’s a discrepancy between what an article says and what the IPCC claims it says – neither the process nor the end result is anything like what we’ve been told.