Conspire: Literally to “breathe together”. To collude. And that is exactly what the NZ mainstream media did this week with regards to the climate change/global warming narrative. So here’s our response.
by Martin Harris 20/9/19
The Conversation, Stuff and the New Zealand Science Media Centre and TVNZ locked arms this week and marched in solidarity to defend the UN-Socialist Climate Emergency (false flag crisis) Narrative against a rising tide of skepticism. Apparently they can’t tackle the questioning attitudes on their own so it’s time to prop each other up. And as we shall see they’ve employed some high powered experts to lead the charge, but NOT from the ranks of Climatology! The tour-de force of this pushback was the article that asked the question:
Climate Explained: Why are climate change sceptics often right-wing conservatives?
I can answer that question quite easily. It’s because we are less likely to blindly swallow Leftist narratives and more likely to question what the media tell us, regardless of the literary gymnastics and graphs the authors of the article use to “explain” our skepticism. I’m a moderate-Right conservative and they aren’t. I can speak for myself thanks.
Firstly, who exactly are the authors of this research?
Yu Luo, Jiaying Zhao and Rebecca M. Todd are with the University of British Colombia. The research paper on which the MSM article is based was accepted in 2017 and published early 2018. Here’s the abstract in PDF:
https://zhaolab.psych.ubc.ca/pdfs/CC_2018.pdf
What is quite clear, from the abstract above, is that these authors/researchers are from the Psychology department and that their objective is the “selling” of the Climate Change narrative through use of language. In other words, they are advising on propaganda tactics:
Our findings suggest that climate-related communications may be most effective if tailored in a manner accounting for how attentional priorities differ between audiences—particularly those with different political orientations.
Yu Luo, Jiaying Zhao and Rebecca M. Todd
This paper by Yu Luo is particularly enlightening:
“Illusions” and “false memories”?
It is really worth checking out the curriculum vitae of these researchers. Some serious marketing and psychology clout there, but not much Climatologological qualification!
What really got me going though, in the MSM article, was the repeat of the old “97% consensus” claim, but with a new qualification added:
The scientific evidence for climate change is unequivocal: 97 per cent of actively publishing climate scientists agree that human activities are causing global warming.
And the abstract that is linked to, in the above quote, tells it all. Just as I’ve covered before in great detail. Here’s a segment from that abstract:
…examining 11 944 climate abstracts from 1991–2011 matching the topics ‘global climate change’ or ‘global warming’. We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no position on AGW, 32.6% endorsed AGW, 0.7% rejected AGW and 0.3% were uncertain about the cause of global warming. Among abstracts expressing a position on AGW, 97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming.
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024
So this is the same tired old information from 2013. Nothing new in the intervening 6 years then. Or at least nothing as favorable for the IPCC position. If one can call this “favorable’ at all. This isn’t “97% of actively publishing climate scientists”. That’s a false statement. It’s 97% of 32% of 11,994 abstracts of peer reviewed papers, (3,707 abstracts) some of which may be multiple abstracts by a single prolific author. Many active scientists publish rarely or not at all.
Everyone agrees that the climate is changing. What we are skeptical about, or disagree about, is how large an effect human activity plays, and in what manner. Take humanity out of the equation. Would the global average temperature continue to rise? Based on available data, quite likely it would, due to a combination of natural factors.
Should we be concerned about environmental pollution? Of course!
Should we be concerned about Socialist agendas disguised as environmentalism? Absolutely.
So in response to the combined efforts of NZ’s Big Players in the MSM, here’s some of our previous content presenting some balance and perspective on the Climate Change narrative, followed by links to some handy resources, free of crafty marketing techniques and pschological tricks. Enjoy.
One can find a great many common sense articles and updates on climate related issues Here:
These three sites are a goldmine of useful information and arguments from both sides of the fence. “Think For Yourself”
Uncensored Is Being Censored
Get your copy from our online store or your local book and magazine retailer…IF you can find it:
As censorship heats up and free thought becomes an increasingly rare commodity, we appeal to our readers to support our efforts to reach people with information now being censored elsewhere. In the last few years, Uncensored itself has been censored, removed from the shelves of two of our biggest NZ retailers-Countdown Supermarkets and Whitcoulls Bookstores-accounting for 74% of total NZ sales.
You can help keep the free press alive by subscribing and/or gifting a subscription to your friends and relatives.
