Global Warming Ideology Wrecked Science | Jeff Reynolds
This post was originally published on
Key Takeaways
In this fascinating episode of the Tom Nelson Podcast, the rise of citizen journalism and its impact on democratizing information was discussed with guest Jeff Reynolds, senior investigative researcher for Restoration of America. Reynolds, who has written a book on dark money in politics, delves into the science and ideology behind the climate movement.
Reynolds became a cataclysmic climate change skeptic after years of scientific fascination, leading him to question the catastrophic claims made by climate change proponents. His skepticism grew as he found that questions about climate change were often met with ad hominem attacks rather than substantive answers. This spurred him to dig deeper into climate science, focusing on the lack of debate and logical fallacies present in the discourse.
The discussion between Tom and Jeff also touched on the "culture of lying" surrounding the theory of man-made global warming, which Reynolds believes became especially prominent following Michael Mann's hockey stick graph. Reynolds' report, "How the Left's Global Warming Ideology Wrecked Science," criticizes the shift from empirical data to computer modeling and interpretation in climate science, which he argues has led to data manipulation and exaggerated predictions of doom.
Reynolds highlights the media's role in perpetuating a fear-based narrative around climate science and points out the financial interests behind climate reporting, including the influence of nonprofits and billionaires.
The discussion also covers the Michael Mann trial and the implications of various scientific revelations on the credibility of climate science. Reynolds expresses concern over the judicial process and the potential bias of a DC jury in assessing the facts of the trial.
Throughout the conversation, Reynolds emphasizes the need for critical thinking and questioning in the face of overwhelming and often one-sided climate messaging.
[
Evaluation of Historical Global Temperature Data: It’s Fake
The concept of measuring a singular “global temperature” is inherently complex due to the natural vast temperature variations across different geographical locations. To derive an accurate average global temperature, extensive data from a multitude of locations is required.
TFTC – Truth for the CommonerStaff
](
Best Quotes
- "The biggest lie in American climate journalism is that reporters cover climate science as a science." - Holman Jenkins (quoted by Jeff Reynolds)This quote underscores the concern that climate journalism has veered away from objective scientific reporting and towards advocacy and fear-mongering.
- "A culture of lying has metastasized around the theory of man-made global warming since its emergence as a prominent political movement in the 1990s." - Jeff ReynoldsReynolds criticizes the spread of misinformation and the lack of honest discourse in the climate debate.
- "The longer the earth goes without proving the theory, the more wild-eyed the predictions of doom get, and the more its adherents resemble members of a cult." - Jeff ReynoldsHere, Reynolds suggests that as the dire predictions of climate change fail to materialize, the rhetoric becomes more extreme and disconnected from empirical evidence.
- "It's the democratization of information." - Jeff Reynolds on citizen journalismReynolds celebrates the role of citizen journalism in providing access to diverse viewpoints and information that might otherwise be suppressed or overlooked.
Conclusion
The discussion between Tom Nelson and Jeff Reynolds offers a critical and insightful look into the climate change debate, emphasizing the importance of skepticism, the examination of evidence, and the recognition of bias in media reporting. Reynolds' perspective challenges the mainstream narrative of climate change and suggests that there is a concerted effort to manipulate data and public perception for political ends. While the podcast presents a nuanced view that may not align with all listeners' beliefs, it encourages a deeper engagement with the facts and a more rigorous analysis of the claims made by climate change advocates. The conversation with Reynolds is a potent reminder of the need for continued dialogue and critical examination in the pursuit of truth, particularly in fields as impactful and contentious as climate science.
