Climate scientists meet to improve brainwashing skills

Washes away scepticism faster than other leading brands

Note that they’re not meeting to hang their heads in shame and discuss the shonky science, fudged data, blocking of FOI requests or intimidation of sceptical climate journals, which is all par for the course. No, this is all about communication – it’s just that they’re not getting their message across properly, obviously. The science is just fine, the public are just too stupid to understand:

REPRESENTATIVES of scientific organisations including the CSIRO and Bureau of Meteorology will meet today to discuss better communication of the science behind man-made climate change, in the wake of crumbling political and public consensus on global warming.

The conference in Sydney, organised by the Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies (FASTS), is part of a long-term bid to develop a ”national communication charter” for major scientific organisations and universities to better spruik the evidence of climate change.

The conference will hear an address from Australia’s chief scientist, Penny Sackett [who is a fully paid up alarmist – see here]. Representatives of the CSIRO, Bureau of Meteorology, Australian Academy of Science and Department of Climate Change, among others, will attend [all on the alarmist bandwagon, of course, because without it, they would lose their juicy funding cheques].

FASTS president Cathy Foley said although public scepticism was on the rise, scientific evidence of man-made climate change had not changed, and it was sad the community was less and less trusting of scientists. [And who do you have to blame for that? The scientists themselves – think “Hockey Stick” and “Climategate”]

Dr Foley said a well-organised and funded climate sceptics’ movement had increasingly captured attention [That old chestnut again – a bunch of retired scientists and lone bloggers are better funded and better organised than the entire global warming industry? Yeah, right].

”We are concerned the debate around climate change has become a left-wing versus right-wing debate – or a kind of religious argument – when it should really be about the strength of the scientific evidence,” Dr Foley said.

The conference was not about politics or ”brainwashing” the public, she added.

The thought never entered my head. Oops, just noticed the title. Maybe it did.

Read it here.

UPDATE: Listen here to how the ABC treats this entire story with kid gloves, and allows Cathy Foley to misrepresent the science as having been settled for hundreds of years. Yes, the principle of greenhouse warming is settled, but the science of climate feedbacks (which is what we need to understand to determing whether we will get catastrophic warming) is most definitely not.


  1. Rick Bradford says:

    Look on the bright side — while they’re wasting time having their struggle meetings, and trying to devise better forms of agit-prop, we’ll be moving the debate ahead in many different directions, related to the science.

  2. Lachlan says:

    What these people need is a talented man like Joseph Goebbels, Hitler’s propaganda minister who could head them in the right direction, or more to the point, keep them on track in obtaining their goals.

    Here are some points from his “Principals of Propaganda” for their consideration that some may recognise.

    6. To be perceived, propaganda must evoke the interest of an audience and must be transmitted through an attention-getting communications medium.

    12. Propaganda may be facilitated by leaders with prestige.

    14. Propaganda must label events and people with distinctive phrases or slogans.
    a. They must evoke desired responses which the audience previously possesses
    b. They must be capable of being easily learned
    c. They must be utilized again and again, but only in appropriate situations
    d. They must be boomerang-proof

    16. Propaganda to the home front must create an optimum anxiety level.
    a. Propaganda must reinforce anxiety concerning the consequences of defeat
    b. Propaganda must diminish anxiety (other than concerning the consequences of defeat) which is too high and which cannot be reduced by people themselves

    18. Propaganda must facilitate the displacement of aggression by specifying the targets for hatred. (this can be reserved for sceptics, or “deniers”)

    Goebbels comprehensive list of principals for their information can be found here:-

  3. cbullitt says:

    Saw this earlier elsewhere. But your title is by far the best–and the art is Primo. Great job.

  4. cbullitt says:

    Simon, caught this nugget via Tom Nelson. The meeting about “Communicating” was CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC.

  5. Baa Humbug says:

    One thing I can’t argue with…

    “scientific evidence of man-made climate change had not changed,”

    It certainly hasn’t. It’s still the same old dodgy Stephan-Boltzman equations, the same old dodgy positive feedbacks etc for the last 22 years.
    And since their polar bears just won’t die off (those pesky bas*ards) the only thing they got is Arctic ice melting in the summer and sea rise at the rate that wouldn’t get an ants d**k wet.

  6. Actually the “science” of “greenhouse gasses” is NOT ‘settled’.

    I’d recommend people get a copy of Elsasser’s 1942, 130 page paper on “The Radiation Balance of the Atmosphere”.

    Pay particular attention to WHY in deriving his “Elsasser Graphs” for calculating day to day heat up and cool down (for immediate range forecasts) he IGNORES THE EFFECT OF CO2!!!

    He does that because, in the Troposphere CO2 is an equal UPFLUX and DOWNFLUX agent.

    In the ’50’s then, Plass derives the mathematics and data for CO2 COOLING of the stratosphere and above, as in the STRATOSPHERE (because of the steradian angle intercepted by the emission of radiation) CO2 is a NET UPFLUX AGENT.

    No, the “science is not settled” even in the radiation realm.

    In point of fact, the people who think it is are just plain – INTELLECTUALLY LAZY!

  7. Mariah Dan says:

    The most disturbing aspect of this brainwashing campaign is that it will be mandatory in our schools and we have no say on the matter! Grrrrrrr….almost as bad as Penny Wong’s “Shout Out for Climate Change” competition.

  8. Colin J Ely says:


    ‘A better funded group….’
    Yeah right! I took a days leave from my job on Friday to protest outside the Victorian Government’s, Department of Sustainability and Environment’s lecture by the CSIRO’s Paul Holper on ‘Dealing with Climate Change Denialism’ I was informed by two ‘heavily armed’ members of the Victoria Police’s, Protective Security Unit that if I attempted to exercise my democratic right under the Westminster System of Democracy to engage in peaceful protest outside of the government theatrette where the lecture was being held, I would be arrested!
    What is our democratically elected government trying to hide from us?


  1. […] on global warming. The conference was not about politics or ''brainwashing'' the public. Climate scientists meet to improve brainwashing skills | Australian Climate Madness […]

%d bloggers like this: