JoNova
A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).
Jo appreciates your support to help her keep doing what she does. This blog is funded by donations. Thanks!
Follow Jo's Tweets To report "lost" comments or defamatory and offensive remarks, email the moderators at: support.jonova AT proton.me
Statistics
Cancel Climate Science – and the Scientists
By Dr. Graham Pinn
There is little debate around climate science, with the much-publicised phrase “The science is settled” used to curtail any dispute. In fact, there is considerable dispute, but it remains unpublished in scientific journals, for fear of loss of job or funding.
A recent international survey, published in The Conversation, found that over 40% of scientists were being harassed or intimidated by their institutions, with climate science being a common indication; the survey did not indicate whether those scientists were protagonist or antagonist to the theory.
There are numerous examples of authors of scientific papers, supporting the CO2 theory, refusing to release underlying details, because others might find errors in their conclusions; there are also many examples of contrary articles being rejected by editors. The “Climategate” scandal of 2009, is just one example of this worldwide phenomenon.
The usual explanation given, is that those against the climate change hypothesis are funded by the fossil fuel industry. There is no mention of the enormous government and renewable industry grants to protagonists. This distortion has led to numerous examples of senior climate scientists, having to wait ‘til retirement, before revealing their opinions. American activist/author of yesteryear, described the phenomenon 100 years ago: ”It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on not understanding”.
More at –
https://saltbushclub.com/2025/03/01/cancel-climate-science-and-the-scientists/#more-2939
50
That is the point of this blog. Firstly, to provide a place where real debate can occur. I have yet to hear actual scientists publicly debate the ideas of Al Gore and James Hansen. The second value in Jo’s Blog is to provide a place where at least the other side of the story can be presented for all time. Ideas can be honed and facts and arguments and news shared.
The reaslity is that a man made CO2 increase, additional CO2 driven warming and warming driven Armageddon including mythical ‘tipping points’, rapid sea rises, storm increases are not debated at in public. Certainly not in what we now call the legacy media.
The new and so called ‘Climate Science’ is entirely political and not scientific. Statements like ‘98% of scientists agree’ are fraudulent fabrications. As are Michael Mann’s Hockey stick and I claim the Ice Hockey Stick. Political fabrications presented as scientific facts.
Whether ‘world’ temperatures go up or down, in 37 years not a single prediction of Climate Science has come true. We are not talking about the future of the planet any more. We are talking about the past. And nothing has happened in four decades except the biggest waste of public money in world history and the crippling of Western democracies and the explosive military growth of China, the only beneficiary.
50
Any discussion of the subject would not be complete without mention of our own climate stalwart, Ian Plimer, a man impossible to cancel. He is an Australian geologist, surprisingly still an Emeritus Professor at Melbourne University, with past University appointments at Adelaide and Newcastle Universities; he is an unequivocal opponent of the climate change hypothesis and has written numerous books on the subject. His views are denigrated as he has, in the past, and still has, connections with the mining industry. Although many years retired, he is still being cancelled at Australian Universities, even had an honorary doctorate cancelled at a European University. He is notable for his phrase about the debate – “They have us outnumbered but we have them outgunned”! He continues to write to put them straight!
40
If the science is settled, then it is not science.
00
My latest AI functional description article.
AI emulates abstract thinking about Kipling, Lady Gaga and The Rolling Stones
By David Wojick
https://www.cfact.org/2025/03/04/ai-emulates-abstract-thinking-about-kipling-lady-gaga-and-the-rolling-stones/
The beginning: “CFACT just produced an impressive example of a chatbot emulating several sorts of abstract thought. At their request the bot GROC 3 created three long song poems successively in the styles of Kipling, Lady Gaga and The Rolling Stones. You can read them here: https://www.cfact.org/2025/02/25/check-out-the-poem-elons-grok-3-ai-wrote-about-cfact/
Chatbots do not think rather they computationally emulate thought. But it is easier to talk as though they actually think so I will do that here. Using emulation language is tedious and clumsy.
The poems are not bad and some lines are really good but that is not my focus. My interest is cognition. To begin with the instruction “write a poem about X” is pretty abstract. It is far more abstract than asking for facts already written about or what someone already said.
Mind you there are thousands of books and articles on poetry and how to write it. A great thing about chatbots is they can read thousands of books in a thousandth of a second so maybe that helped this one.
Asking for a long poem in the style of a specific writer or performer is a whole different critter. To begin with the robot has to figure out what that style is. Then it must come up with an applicable poem in language that fits that style. Being able to do this is truly impressive.
I do not know how to describe a style. Then too I have not read much Kipling or heard Lady Gaga sing, although I am a big Stones fan. So I cannot guess how long it would take me to do what this bot did in seconds or less. Maybe weeks, months, or years. Maybe never because it takes talent or in this case the successful emulation of talent.
I have read people saying that chatbots are just statistical engines that find the text most likely to be the answer to the query. Since these song lines have clearly never been written before that cannot be all there is to it.”
Lots more in the article. Please share it.
21
I don’t play with AI but would be intrigued to see what it does “in the style of Kraftwerk”.
They tried to sound like AI, even though they didn’t have a computer.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kraftwerk
Ironically, Kraftwerk did not own a computer at the time of recording Computer World.
The band is also known for being notoriously reclusive, providing rare and enigmatic interviews, using life-size mannequins and robots while conducting official photo shoots…
anyone trying to contact the band for collaboration would be told the studio telephone did not have a ringer since, while recording, the band did not like to hear any kind of noise pollution. Instead, callers were instructed to phone the studio precisely at a certain time, whereupon the phone would be answered by Ralf Hütter, despite never hearing the phone ring.
20
Lots of images in the media of people holding sandbags to be filled in Qld.
https://www.cmac.com.au/materials-handling/bagging-equipment
Seems odd – are these all photos that are being posed?
10
Meanwhile, surf’s up.
10
ABC waking up and starting to smell the MAHA coffee
https://www.abc.net.au/news/health/2025-03-04/obesity-overweight-increase-children-young-people-australia/105002482
Can’t figure out if they mean that children not yet born will be obese or if those around now will be obese adults.
10