Denying ‘Climate Change’

protestingHere is Dana Milbank of WaPo celebrating the “retreat” of climate change deniers, “There is no denying it: Climate-change deniers are in retreat.” He concludes his op-ed piece by noting, “that corporations are becoming reluctant to bankroll crazy theories, the surrender of climate-change deniers will follow.” For Milbank this marks the historic turning point marking the collapse of flat-earth science “crazies.”

The AGW (anthropogenic (man-made) global warming) thesis was initiated by the United Nations environmental program that was established in 1972 and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) established in 1988. It got its biggest boost with the now discredited hockey stick model advanced by Michael Mann in 1999 and now has a distinctly religious fervor led by Al Gore and his acolytes including world leaders from English PM David Cameron to President Obama.

Yes. Many scientists have all along denied the consensus “settled science” claim advanced by Gorites. But denying the settled science thesis is not denying climate change. The earth’s climate has been changing, probably is changing and indubitably will continue to change. What the so-called climate change deniers like MIT Professor Richard Lindzen have really denied is any or all of the following:

(1) That the scientific community has solid knowledge of the direction or duration the current phase of climate change.

(2) That the scientific community has solid knowledge of the extent of the role of C02 in climate change.

(3) That the scientific community has solid knowledge of the extent of the role of man-made C02 in climate change.

But by flipping back and forth, as if interchangeable, between ‘global warming’ and ‘climate change’ and failing to distinguish between denying conclusive knowledge to predict the extent and direction of climate change and outright denial of climate change, the IPCC has managed to brand those who maintain any of (1) – (3) as being climate change deniers — which would indeed be ridiculous.

The turning point? Maybe the turning point is the reverse of what Milbank would have us believe. The conservative American Legislative Exchange Council, a powerful group that pushes for states to pass laws that are often drafted by industry, is threatening to sue those who label its staff as “deniers”.

It is time for Heartland Institute, the Heritage Foundation and other conservative “think tanks” to get on board and sue those who would brand them as climate change deniers and fail to make the distinction between denying knowledge of what is the case and asserting knowledge of what is not the case.


Comments (5)

  • Avatar



    I don’t know anybody that denies climate change. It is the most stupid meaningless phrase ever to be dreamed up by ‘warmists’.

    It is like saying does anyone deny ‘people age’. Lefties and progressives are so cerebrally challenged that they would probably disagree.

    Politicians love ambigious meaningless phrases so that they can mould them to any meaning that suits their deceitful agenda.

  • Avatar



    The intent of calling someone a “denier “is to harm their reputation and as a put down to have other people think less of them .
    It is also intended to intimidate them into silence .
    The brand Global Warming Fear failed with each passing year of actual temperature data of over 18 with no discernible warming hence the urgent need to rebrand to Climate Change .

    The use of the word “denier ” by those promoting their political and social views
    didn’t change. As a result continuing to call people and entities “deniers ” is a sure fired way to find yourself in court .

    The American Legislative Exchange Council and others that have been subjected to defamation as a means to harm their reputation and silence them have every reason to protect their reputation and their right to freedom of speech .

  • Avatar



    The term “denier” is one that clearly belongs in religion and has no place whatsoever in science. Pointing a bony finger of indignation at someone while accusing them as a [i]denier[/i] is something right out of the witchcraft trial mindset.

    Resorting to the “denier” strategy is a sure sign of desperation from AGW scammers.

    • Avatar



      I have to respectfully disagree.

      Those who [i]deny[/i] that climates have been warmer in the past including the current interglacial, and those who [i]deny[/i] that the Earth’s climate changes naturally, are most certainly [i]deniers[/i]. [i]Deniers[/i] of well established facts. The name ‘denier’ suits them well.

      They are natural climate change [i]deniers[/i].

      It is fun using their own words against them, and so easy to do.

  • Avatar

    Captain Dave


    There is an extra preface “” in the first link.

Comments are closed