Statement from Kip Hansen – May 6, 2021
The Climate Propaganda Cabal, called Covering Climate Now (CCNow), is a fantastic, terrifyingly effective organization that floods the print and online news media with a single message: “The climate emergency is here. To keep a planet worth living in, humanity must act immediately. If the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is not reduced, the extraordinary heat, storms, forest fires and ice melt of 2020 will become routine and could “render a significant part of the earth uninhabitable”. “
Any moderately educated, well-read person, or anyone with even a minimum of common sense, knows that this message is inherently wrong – but due to the constant flurry of messages that repeat the meme endlessly, many people everywhere have wherever she looked began to think, despite her instincts and intellect, that it might just be true.
This is how propaganda should work – – and it does work. Richard Alan Nelson in his book A Chronology and Glossary of Propaganda in the United States, provides a definition of the term: “Propaganda is neutrally defined as a systematic form of purposeful persuasion that seeks to influence the emotions, attitudes, opinions and actions of certain target groups for ideological, political or commercial purposes through the controlled transmission of one-sided messages (which may or may not be factual) via mass and direct media channels. ”
That is the stated purpose of Climate Now – see my previous essay, The Climate Propaganda Cabal.
One of the techniques CCNow uses is deliberately blurring the lines between opinion and hard, factual science news. They do this through their efforts to share stories.
Today’s example:
On May 4, 2021, Tallblokes Talkshop highlighted a story that appeared on PHYS.ORG. Phys.org is a unit of Science X and advertises itself as the “Phys.org Internet news portal provides the latest science news”. The story published on Phys.org reads: “The global warming limit of 1.5 degrees is not impossible – but it will soon be” by Bill Hare, Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, Joeri Rogelj and Piers Forster. The bottom line of the story is:
“The Paris Agreement was passed in 2015 by 195 countries. The inclusion of the 1.5 ° C warming limit came after a long push by vulnerable countries with small islands and least developed countries, for which reaching this target represents the best chance of survival. They were supported by other climate-damaging nations and a coalition of ambitious countries.
The 1.5 degree C limit wasn’t torn out of thin air – it was informed by the best science available. Between 2013 and 2015, a comprehensive review process by the United Nations found that limiting warming to 2 ° C in this century would not prevent dangerous climate change. “
While almost nothing in these two paragraphs is literally true, I have no objection to the authors who state it, since they wrote theirs Opinion, originally published at The conversation.
Here are the contexts: Phys.org, a scientific news agency, has a contributing partner, The Conversation, which is a basic “opinion page” for academics, despite their promise, “To inform public debate with knowledge-based journalism that is responsible, ethical and backed by evidence. “The only qualifications.” To be published by The Conversation you must currently be employed as a researcher or academic at a university or research institution. “The Conversation is an organization partner of Covering Climate Now, the dedicated propaganda organization for climate alarms.
Four authors, scholars, write a statement on The Conversation. At The Conversation, their associations and conflicts of interest are clearly indicated in the sidebar. [ I insert the disclosures below, readers in a hurry can skip the blockquote – kh ]
Disclosure Statement
Bill Hare receives funding from the European Climate Foundation, Bloomberg Philanthropy, and the Climate Works Foundation
Carl-Friedrich Schleussner receives funding from the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (01LN1711A) and within the framework of the Horizon 2020 research and innovation program of the European Union under the grant no. 820829 (RESTRICTION). He is associated with the Humboldt University of Berlin and Climate Analytics.
Joeri Rogelj receives funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program. He is a member of the Grantham Institute – Climate Change & Environment at Imperial College London and the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis. He is the coordinating lead author of the IPCC 1.5 ° C Special Report and lead author of the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report.
Piers Forster receives funding from the UK Funding Council (UKRI) and the EU. He is a member of the UK Climate Committee and lead author of IPCC reports.
With the disclosures, knowledgeable readers can easily determine the authors’ bias – they are all heavily invested in the IPCC and its 1.5 ° C global temperature target and mandated solution – thereby completely eliminating the use of fossil fuels.
These Opinion articles will be reposted immediately as hard on Phys.org Science news story, but it is published without The Conversation’s disclosure statement and is not referred to as an opinion – that shift from opinion to fact is facilitated by Covering Climate Now’s resource sharing program.
Scientific opinion so is magically transformed into Scientific fact. At least as it is received and perceived by the public.
Propaganda in its most powerful form.
# # # # #
Author’s comment:
This is not an isolated incident as readers who follow science news already know.
In CCNow’s statement on the climate emergency, this trick is used below:
“Failure to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide…. could “render a significant part of the world uninhabitable,” warned a recent Scientific American article.
The linked SciAm article is a OpEd piece (Repeat the link above) no report on scientific findings, no research results and definitely Not Scientific fact written by “William J. Ripple … lead author of Warning World Scientists of a Climate Emergency”. Self-referential, circular opinion presented as fact.
Lektor’s Den – readers beware.
Many readers may just think that this CCNow thing is just “business as usual” to the media. It is not. It’s a whole new level of deliberate corruption in journalism propagandistic media activism that disregards the truth and replaces opinion, bias, worldview and politics in its place – it is a necessary media push to brainwash the population.
I hope to expose this anti-journalism cabal in a series of essays on what it is and what it is doing over the next few weeks.
I’ll be more likely to see your comments if you direct them to me: “Kip …”.
Thank you for reading.
# # # # #
Like this:
Loading…
Comments are closed.