To effectively market propaganda as science, one must first capture influential government and academic institutions. This disturbing playbook is exactly what climate alarmists have executed over recent decades, transforming respected public institutions into advocacy-driven cash cows. [emphasis, links added]
By converting objective scientific inquiry into politically motivated fearmongering, these institutions have effectively secured an endless stream of taxpayer funding.
When NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) was established in 1961, it was dedicated to rigorous, unbiased research into planetary atmospheres and astrophysics. Its founder, Robert Jastrow, envisioned a scientific powerhouse, contributing objectively and reliably to America’s space and environmental exploration.
Unfortunately, GISS today has become almost unrecognizable, increasingly resembling a politically motivated advocacy group rather than a bastion of objective science.
Why was this dramatic shift necessary? The answer is simple yet alarming: without the manufactured fear of an impending climate catastrophe, taxpayer funding for research would quickly dry up.
Alarmism thus ensures continuous funding, justifying endless grants, inflated salaries, and expansive bureaucratic structures. This is the dangerous reality taxpayers face today… an elaborate charade masked as necessary science.
Gavin Schmidt: Scientist or Climate Crusader?
Since Gavin Schmidt took over GISS in 2014, the institute has transitioned from a scientific entity into an activist hub. Schmidt, who cofounded the controversial RealClimate website, frequently blurs the line between unbiased research and advocacy.
Under his leadership, GISS’s communications routinely highlight sensational claims about looming climate disasters, sidelining rigorous historical context and uncertainties intrinsic to climate models.
This activism-driven approach ensures taxpayer dollars fund fear-based narratives rather than objective scientific discoveries, enriching careers built upon anxiety and alarmism, rather than scientific rigor and empirical accuracy.
Climate.gov: Institutionalized Fear at Taxpayer Expense
NOAA’s Climate.gov epitomizes taxpayer-funded climate alarmism. The website consistently presents exaggerated, worst-case scenarios as inevitable outcomes, often ignoring or minimizing contradictory evidence and uncertainties.
The site’s alarming content serves primarily to foster public anxiety rather than educate citizens on balanced and scientifically robust perspectives.
By choosing sensationalism over balanced scientific communication, Climate.gov transforms taxpayer resources into tools for maintaining a perpetual state of public fear. This method of communication dangerously politicizes climate science, funneling public funds into sustaining anxiety-driven narratives.
The Climate Bureaucracy’s Financial Web
NASA GISS, Climate.gov, and the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP), the producer of the influential National Climate Assessment (NCA), are deeply interconnected financially and ideologically.
These entities perpetuate exaggerated threats to justify their existence, continually producing alarming and unrealistic climate projections.
Rather than objective analysis, their reports systematically ignore evidence contradicting dire predictions, further entrenching their narrative and funding streams (explore the troubling details).
James Hansen and the Birth of Climate Alarmism
The roots of this alarmist shift trace back to James Hansen’s impactful 1988 congressional testimony. His dramatic statements permanently embedded fear-based narratives within governmental climate science, overshadowing earlier research indicating minimal warming trends.
Hansen’s testimony initiated a powerful strategy of sustained urgency, ensuring continuous public funding for alarmist climate narratives (uncover Hansen’s influential role).
The IPCC’s Global Confirmation Bias
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) further institutionalized this bias, exclusively highlighting negative climate outcomes while systematically ignoring potential benefits of increased CO2.
This deliberate skewing of information ensures global funding streams remain secure, perpetuating alarmist narratives rather than fostering comprehensive scientific understanding (learn more about this global bias).
Climate Costs Myth: Debunking Economic Alarmism
Climate alarmists frequently claim escalating economic impacts from climate-related disasters.
However, even NOAA’s data consistently demonstrates no sustained rise in weather-related economic losses, contradicting alarmist assertions.
Yet, public funds continue to pour into alarmist narratives, inflating bureaucratic structures and salaries (see the data disproving these claims).
Irrational Fear is written by climatologist Dr. Matthew Wielicki and is reader-supported. If you value what you have read here, please consider subscribing and supporting the work that goes into it.
Read rest at Irrational Fear
