Breaking: Actor Ryan O’Neal Dead At 82
X User Asks Question of 2A Community and is Unprepared for Response
Friday Fun: We Give You #FluteGuy
Friday Fun: Homeowner Finds Exterminator's Notebook, Hilarity Ensues
Good Luck With That: Prime Minister Of Barbados Demands $4.9 Trillion In Reparations
'Things That Make You Go Hmm': Map Of Charitable Giving Is Eye Opening
Florida Democrats Send Letter to DeSantis to End Non-Existent 'Book Bans'
The Hypocrisy Caucus: Anti-Israel Democrats Have Audacity to Celebrate Chanukah and Denoun...
Biden Avoids Reporters but KJP Assures America the President Is 'Proud of His...
LAPD Says They're Aware of Possible Upcoming 'First Amendment Activity' in Los Angeles......
Twitter Wrecks Journos Using Pictures of Hamas Prisoners to Try to Decry 'Western...
Is It Just Me or are Antisemites REALLY Stupid? Here Are a Few...
Harvard President Desperately Backpedals in Harvard Crimson Interview, But Will it Save He...
Marina Medvin BLISTERS Red Cross in BRUTAL Thread for Shaming PARENTS of Israeli...
UN Climate Summit Eco-Alarmists Want to Keep YOU From Eating Meat but Here's...

WaPo's Take on Nobel Prize-Winning Scientist Who Says There's 'No Climate Crisis' Is Something Else


In 2022, Dr. John Clauser was the recipient of a Nobel Prize in physics, and recently he said something that apparently has suddenly made him a heretic among the "climate emergency" fearmongers: 

The Washington Post could be counted on to try and protect the preferred narrative when it comes to climate change being the biggest threat the world faces (according to President Biden): 

Check out one of the "experts" the Post quoted in an attempt to refute Clauson:

Aside from quoting debunked "experts" on the subject, here's what the WaPo story's author seemed to think is relevant information when it comes to the attempt to discredit Clauser:

The event showcased Clauser’s remarkable shift since winning one of the world’s most prestigious awards for his groundbreaking experiments with light particles in the 1970s. His recent denial of global warming has alarmed top climate scientists, who warn that he is using his stature to mislead the public about a planetary emergency.

Clauser, 80, who has a booming voice and white hair he often leaves uncombed, has brushed off these concerns. He says skepticism is a key part of the scientific process.


Clauser, who wore a gray blazer with black jeans and Teva sandals, appeared buoyant as he took the stage. He cycled through a PowerPoint presentation that began with the exclamation: “Great news! There is no climate crisis!”

How long will it be until the Post has an article blaming Clauser's "often left uncombed" hair on climate change? Also, the "top scientists" pushing climate change panic are probably alarmed by what Clauser said, but not for the reason they want everybody to believe. 

The story mentions "scientific consensus," and when the climate alarmists use the term "consensus" they're not making the point they think.

You might have seen the wise words of Michael Crichton before, but if you haven't read his takedown of the "scientific consensus" crowd (looking at you Al Gore, John Kerry, et al), I'll close with this:

“I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you're being had.

Let's be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.

There is no such thing as consensus science. If it's consensus, it isn't science. If it's science, it isn't consensus. Period.”

There was once a "consensus of scientists" agreeing many things were true that turned out to be false -- or vice-versa. 

The "consensus" approach is merely an attempt to try and keep anybody with a different opinion from speaking out, and anybody who does that is not motivated by truth and science. 


Trending on Twitchy Videos