‘March for Science’ invokes God, Hitler, Gay Marriage, Racism, Sexism – Blames GOP for making climate worse

Climate Depot’s Round Up of Coverage of the alleged ‘March For Science’

Climate Depot’s Marc Morano: “Having spent the day in DC on April 22 interviewing the marchers, it struck me about how this is first and foremost a march for endless government funding, ideology and in support of a no dissent policy. (Another new study gives plenty of reason to dissent: New Climate Study Calls EPA’s Labeling Of CO2 A Pollutant ‘Totally False’) The Trump administration can help make science great again by resisting these pay up and shut up demands for taxpayer research money.” See: Bloomberg News: Obama ‘stashed’ $77 billion in ‘climate money’ across agencies to elude budget cuts

Watch: Princeton Physicist Dr. Will Happer criticizes ‘March for Science’: ‘It is sort of a religious belief for them’ – Dr. Will Happer on Fox News: Asked about more government funded science?  Happer: “We’ve had 8 years of very highly politicized so-called research on climate. It’s not what most of us would recognize as real scientific research. Something where the outcome was demanded before the funding was provided. We should tend to real environmental problems and fix them and stop chasing these phantom problems that are really just religious dogma.”

Watch CNN Debate: Bill Nye blows gasket when a real scientist Dr. Will Happer schools him on ‘climate change’

#

Pictures and reports about the ‘March for Science’

‘March for Science’: Politics Disguised as Science: When to Doubt a Scientific ‘Consensus’ – The early claims of 97% ‘consensus’: In 1992, former Vice President Al Gore reassured his listeners, “Only an insignificant fraction of scientists deny the global warming crisis. The time for debate is over. The science is settled.”

Climatologist Dr. Roger A. Pielke Sr: “If there was any doubt the “March on Science” is political – The march is explicitly a political movement” See full article

Science March 2

Anti-Trump ‘March For Science’ Protest Has Problems W/ Bill Nye Because He’s A White Guy

13 Most Ridiculous Predictions Made on Earth Day, 1970

March For Science To Bill Nye, The Science Guy: Take A Back Seat, You’re White.

Gender strudies

Climatologist Dr. Judith Curry rips ‘march for science’ as ‘a self-serving navel gazing exercise for scientists’ — A ‘we don’t like Trump’ tantrum

The March is over: 

Prof. Roger Pielke Jr.: ‘The smartest people on the planet want to oppose Trump & the best they can come up with

REPORT: 7 Gunshots Fired into Skeptical Climatologists’ Office at University in Alabama – ‘March to Silence?!’

Via: Climatologist Dr. Roy Spencer

Shots Fired into the Christy/Spencer Building at UAH

April 24th, 2017 by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.

A total of seven shots were fired into our National Space Science and Technology Center (NSSTC) building here at UAH (University of Alabama Huntsville) over the weekend.

All bullets hit the 4th floor, which is where John Christy’s office is (my office is in another part of the building). (Note: Climatologist Dr. John Christy recently testified to Congress. – Climatologist Dr. John Christy tells Congress: ‘Consensus Science is not Science’)

Given that this was Earth Day weekend, with a March for Science passing right past our building on Saturday, I think this is more than coincidence. When some people cannot argue facts, they resort to violence to get their way. It doesn’t matter that we don’t “deny global warming”; the fact we disagree with its seriousness and the level of human involvement in warming is enough to send some radicals into a tizzy.

Maybe the “March For Science” should have been called the “March To Silence”.

Campus and city police say they believe the shots were fired from a passing car, based upon the angle of entry into one of the offices. Shell casings were recovered outside.

This is a developing story. I have no other details.

#

End Dr. Spencer report.

Former Obama Official: Bureaucrats Manipulate Climate Stats To Influence Policy

By CHRIS WHITE – The Daily Caller

A former member of the Obama administration claims Washington D.C. often uses “misleading” news releases about climate data to influence public opinion.

Former Energy Department Undersecretary Steven Koonin told The Wall Street Journal Monday that bureaucrats within former President Barack Obama’s administration spun scientific data to manipulate public opinion.

“What you saw coming out of the press releases about climate data, climate analysis, was, I’d say, misleading, sometimes just wrong,” Koonin said, referring to elements within the Obama administration he said were responsible for manipulating climate data.

He pointed to a National Climate Assessment in 2014 showing hurricane activity has increased from 1980 as an illustration of how federal agencies fudged climate data. Koonin said the NCA’s assessment was technically incorrect.

“What they forgot to tell you, and you don’t know until you read all the way into the fine print is that it actually decreased in the decades before that,” he said. The U.N. published reports in 2014 essentially mirroring Koonin’s argument.…

Why This Scientist Did Not Attend The ‘Science March’ – ‘Hijacked’ by ‘political partisanship’

Alex Berezow

Senior Fellow of Biomedical Science

Dr. Alex Berezow joined the American Council on Science and Health as Senior Fellow of Biomedical Science in May 2016. Dr. Berezow is a prolific science writer whose work regularly appears in BBC News, The Economist, and USA Today, where he serves as a member of the Board of Contributors. With Hank Campbell in 2012, he co-authored the book Science Left Behind, which was an environmental policy bestseller. Formerly, he was the founding editor of RealClearScience. He holds a Ph.D. in microbiology.

By Alex Berezow

While a march to support science sounds like a good idea, given the agenda, this scientist will not be attending.

I wrote previously of my concern that the Science March would be hijacked by the kind of political partisanship it should instead be concerned about – and that has indeed come true. This fear was based on not-so-subtle hints provided by its Twitter feed, such as embracing “intersectionality” (a concept taught in classes on feminism) as a core principle. To its credit, the march’s Twitter account has stopped dropping hints; now, it’s openly stating what its agenda actually is:

If you’re wondering what this has to do with science, you’re certainly not alone. The answer, of course, is nothing. These issues are the primary concern of revisionist historians and social justice warriors, not empirically-minded scientists.

The group’s updated website* sheds no new light on its cause. The front page is full of trite platitudes, such as: “We are scientists and science enthusiasts… Our diversity is our greatest strength.” This screenshot is from the diversity page:

It’s curious that a website that seeks to include everybody conspicuously left men, whites, and Christians off the diversity list. Similarly, the site’s mission statement is odd:

The march supports publicly funded science. That’s good, but what about privately funded science, where the majority of basic research and the overwhelming bulk of applied research, is done? Non-academic science makes up the vast majority of research in America. According to R&D Magazine, last year the U.S. spent $514 billion on research and development, 64% of which ($328 billion) came from industry. Why don’t those scientists count? Despite an enigmatic commitment to “diversity,” the march leaves out the majority of scientists. And the private sector is actually far more diverse in science than universities are.

Claiming to support evidence-based policies is nice, but …

Bill Nye, The Cognitive Dissonance Guy – ‘He is a junk science guy’

Bill Nye Says Climate Change Deniers Have a Bad Case of Cognitive Dissonance | WIRED

By Tony Heller – Real Climate Science

Had Bill ever actually looked at the data, he would have known that the frequency of February 70 degree days has actually declined since 1920. The warmest February was 1976, which came immediately before the three coldest winters on record in the US.

Less than one year after the warmest February in 1976, it was snowing in Miami

20 Jan 1977, Page 3 – Valley News

The warmest February temperature on record in the US, was 104 degrees at Rio Grande City, Texas on February 26, 1902. The average warmest February temperature at all 1,218 USHCN stations is 78 degrees.

It is painfully obvious that Bill is unfamiliar with both the data and the authorities he claims to represent. He is a junk science guy, and because of his influence on trusting children, his disinformation campaign is a threat to both science and civil society.

A real ‘March for Science’ would celebrate scientific puzzles, disagreements, & competing ideas’

Nye is a good example of someone who promotes science as a close-minded ideology, not an open search for truth.

A real “March for Science” would celebrate scientific puzzles, disagreements, and competing ideas rather than fear them.

Just ask Italian philosopher of science Marcello Pera. In his book The Discourses of Science, he writes that science advances as scientists argue about how to interpret the evidence. They can only do that, though, if they are free to challenge established ideas and advance new ones.

Those who truly want to support science should defend the right of all scientists — including dissenters — to express their views. Those who stigmatize dissent do not protect science from its enemies. Instead, they subvert the process of scientific discovery they claim to revere.

Ron Bailey at Reason reminds us of an important point:

One problem is that many of the marchers apparently believe that scientific evidence necessarily implies the adoption of certain policies. This ignores the always salient issue of trade-offs. For example, acknowledging that man-made global warming could become a significant problem does not mean that the only “scientific” policy response must be the immediate deployment of the current versions of solar and wind power.…

CBS NEWS PROMOTES CLIMATE REALISM ON EVENING NEWS

While we thank CBS News for including us in its Earth Day coverage, the clips from the interview they used and their manner of presenting them reveal the network’s continued bias against sound science and economics in the climate change debate. We had hoped for better. Here are some things we think were especially unfair:

  • The opening sentence of the feature has a host saying “they call themselves ‘climate realists,’” as though the term were new, made up, or not in general use. It might be new to CBS reporters, but we and other groups and individuals have been using it for many years (see here, here, here, and here) to distinguish our views from “alarmists” who make no secret that they are using rhetoric and even “myths” to frighten the public into adopting their political agenda.
  • Reporter Dean Reynolds says The Heartland Institute works out of “this office park” in Arlington Heights, Illinois. The image shown is of our building… we own and fill the entire 13,000 s.f. building with more than 30 staff plus interns, a public meeting space, and research library. We’re proud of our new headquarters.
  • Reynolds contrasts Joseph Bast’s views on climate change with “scientists” and is careful to point out that “Bast is not a scientist.” True, and Bast acknowledged that prior to the interview, during the interview, and many times in past interviews. But Bast has co-edited four volumes in the Climate Change Reconsidered series summarizing and citing thousands of peer-reviewed studies on climate change, a series so highly regarded it has been cited more than 100 times in peer-reviewed articles and was translated into Chinese and published by the Chinese Academy of Science. He has been publisher of Environment & Climate News for twenty years. He understands the issue and is qualified to write and speak on it.
  • Reynolds, who admitted during the interview that “I don’t know the science,” claims Bast’s views are “dismissed … as propaganda for fossil fuels” by scientific and government entities. In fact, thousands of scientists, possibly most scientists in the world, agree with Bast (see here, here, here, and here). Moreover, most independent conservative and libertarian think tanks in the world have endorsed climate realism. Nearly 100 of them have cosponsored one or more of The Heartland Institute’s conferences on climate change,