Share this...



It’s worrisome enough that the German government itself recently issued a brochure singling out, naming, and defaming German and American climate science skeptics. Today we have one of Germany’s most prestigious science associations actively backing adolescent-level attacks on skeptics who have decided not to take part in the collective climate hysteria.

This morning on Twitter I happened to come across the following tweet:

Helmholtz Center’s Climate Service Center displays its ugly ideological side in defaming skeptics as deniers. Click here to view video.

Inhofe, Morano, Michaels, Bachmann labeled “deniers”

The above tweet comes from the Climate Service Center, which provides a link to an intolerant video called “The League of Deniers“, which was produced by Kickstarter.com. In summary the video portrays skeptics as “deniers”, claims that “the public is misinformed” and that skeptics’ words are “human foolishness”.

The Climate Service Center even uses the derogatory label “Leugner” (denier) to describe the skeptics in its tweet (my emphasis):

So why is the Climate Service Center stooping to such sophomoric behavior and what organization is behind the Climate Service Center? The answer to the first question is purely the subject of speculation. The answer to the second question is clear, if not surprising: It is Germany’s prestigious Helmholtz Center Geesthacht.

At its website we learn that the main function of the Climate Service Center is to act as the communications “connection between science on one side and business and politics on the other side“. We have to wonder what it is that the center and the Helmholtz Center wish to communicate.

Obviously some activists at the Helmholtz Center’s communications arm are sending an activist, sophomoric message these days. They seem to have no idea of the importance skepticism has in science, and why there are even climate science skeptics at all. Skeptics in science? What for!

To help them understand why there are skeptics when it comes to climate science, below are some questions that us skeptics have been waiting 15 years to receive answers.

1. Why has there been no global warming for 17 years?

2. Why have 97% of the climate models failed to foresee this?

3. Why has Antarctic sea ice been well above normal for more than 2 years?

4. Why are northern hemispheric winters getting colder?

5. What makes the present warm period any different from that of the Medieval Warm Period?

6. Why is it that CO2 has been suddenly assumed to be the major climate factor and the rest like the sun and oceans are ignored?

7. If there is consensus on man-made climate change, then why is there so much controversy over it?

8. Do you think it’s not necessary to have skeptics in order for science to progress?

Perhaps instead of wasting taxpayer resources on the sophomoric defamation and ridicule of those who legitimately ask questions, the Helmholtz Center ought to focus on providing some clear answers for the above questions for once.

In the portrait video of the Climate Service Center featuring director Guy Brasseur, he tells us that the Climate Service Center’s job is to communicate science to society for the purpose of decision-making. Again, with its tweet, what message are they really trying to communicate by linking to defamatory Kickstarter video?

Climate Service Center director Guy Brasseur says they provide valuable information to re-insurance companies. Photo cropped from portrait video.

What was set up as a valuable communication organization, the Climate Service Center appears today to have devolved into a propaganda arm of a state-sponsored ideology – especially when one looks at the quality of the climate information they disseminate: Think for a minute, for example, how the Met Office has gotten 11 of the last 12 winter forecasts wrong and that 97% of the climate models have been wrong over the last 15 years. Is this really the information quality the public wants to have communicated to them? When information is that bad, and is packaged by ideologues with an agenda, then it is certainly not helping society. Rather it is harming it.

What’s really frightening is the seemingly close relationship that the Climate Service Center keeps with the re-insurance industry, as is exposed by the portrait video. For almost an entire segment Brasseur speaks of the valuable services they provide to the insurance industry and how important they are in helping them set their premiums! I kid you not. Brasseur proudly says:

And naturally they come to us and say, ‘Could you please tell us what we can expect in the future?'”

Wink, wink.

Gee, does anyone think there could be a conflict of interest there. This reminds us of how the Munich Re is very close to the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact research (PIK). This is just explosive corruption waiting to happen. You produce the horror scenarios; we jack up the premiums!

A close look at the supervisory boards of the various institutes and insurance companies probably would yield some very interesting results and revelations. The undue influence and closeness that major reinsurance companies have with German scientific institutes is worrisome and the potential for corruption there is far too great.

Examples of info for decision-making that gets communicated:

– thegwpf.org/u-s-governments-amazingly-wrong-forecast-winter/

– exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/Exeter-based-Met-Office-html

– journalist-on-met-office-global-temperature-forecasts/

– http://www.thegwpf.org/met-office-wrong-2/

– notalotofpeopleknowthat.com/who-is-worse-slingo/