Summary of #46 - John Robson: “Do NOT be silenced”

00:00:00 - 00:45:00

John Robson, executive director of the Climate Discussion Nexus, is critical of climate science and the way it has been used to silence dissenters. He argues that the hostility towards climate skeptics is not scientifically justified, and there are flaws in the mathematical modeling used to support the theory that CO2 drives temperature. Robson suggests that proponents of the climate alarmist movement lack a basic understanding of scientific terminology and are careless with statistical work. He emphasizes the importance of welcoming skeptical critique in debates, and believes that the common sense of the average person is sufficient to unravel big questions. Robson calls for societal preparedness and resilience instead of relying on unproven predictions to avoid being caught off-guard in the event of unexpected changes in the climate.

• 00:00:00 In this section, John Robson, executive director of the Climate Discussion Nexus and a historian by training, discusses how he got involved in climate research over a quarter of a century ago and began writing about it when Canada’s prime minister Jean Chrétien began going on about “climate deniers”. Robson asserts that the hostility and aggression behind such accusations were not justified by the science behind global warming. To bolster his case, Robson turned to interviewing distinguished atmospheric physicists like Will Happer to critique the premise that atmospheric CO2 determines the temperature on the planet, and also looked at past history to see if atmospheric CO2 and temperature tended to correlate, discovering that evidence disagreed with the alarmist narrative.
• 00:05:00 In this section, John Robson discusses the flaws in the mathematical modeling used to support the theory that CO2 drives temperature. He cites examples of how preconceived notions can influence these models and refers to Michael Mann’s removal of the medieval warm period when constructing his model. Robson also notes that he cannot predict the future of the earth’s climate, as complex and non-linear factors contribute to the cycles, citing the shifting climate patterns throughout the Holocene period. He argues for societal preparedness and resilience instead of relying on unproven predictions to avoid being caught off-guard in the event of unexpected changes in the climate.
• 00:10:00 In this section, John Robson discusses the limitations of computer models in predicting complex systems such as climate change and the economy. He notes the underlying assumptions of the modelers as what drive these models, stating that changing the assumptions leads to different results. Robson further raises skepticism about the impact of anthropogenic global warming, suggesting that the increase of CO2 does not significantly affect temperature. He also questions the popular belief among climate alarmists that human CO2 is not absorbed as natural CO2 is, arguing that the biosphere's inability to absorb all CO2 remains unexplained.
• 00:15:00 In this section, John Robson argues that proponents of the climate alarmism movement lack a basic understanding of scientific terminology and are careless with statistical work. He cites examples of this, such as John Kerry's blanket analogy and the continuous claims of imminent Arctic melting. Robson suggests that this is not a deliberate lie, but rather a result of being too fired up and passionate about their cause. He concludes that many people throughout history have clung to implausible, even incorrect, ideas, and the climate alarmist movement is no exception to this.
• 00:20:00 In this section, John Robson explains how data can be adjusted when it doesn't align with predictions. For instance, he mentions how the U.S. land temperatures have been adjusted, which is not due to conspiracy but because something must be wrong with the numbers. Similarly, Robson points out the Arctic ice was at a cyclical high in the late 70s, and thus, caution is needed when interpreting the changes. As an example, he visited Glacier National Park, where a brochure claimed that climate change was destroying the glaciers. However, the map showed that the glaciers started melting in the 1700s, way before humans left their footprints, and the melting slowed down in recent times. Robson shares his experience of running his YouTube channel, where they help people by sharing facts and information to not get intimidated in debates. Though Robson's videos get thousands of views, he emphasizes the importance of getting small pledges from ordinary people to help continue his work.
• 00:25:00 support for Jordan Peterson and the importance of Skeptics promoting each other's work, John Robson, co-founder of the Climate Discussion Nexus, emphasizes the necessity for an alternate voice in climate science that challenges the mainstream media and government-funded academia. He invites viewers to support their work through donations and to share the material with others as a form of support. Robson also encourages Skeptics to reinforce one another instead of competing and to avoid being dogmatic in their views. Though he has not had many live debates with climate alarmists due to their tendency to avoid argument and debate, Robson welcomes the opportunity to do so.
• 00:30:00 In this section, John Robson, a Canadian documentary filmmaker and political commentator, discusses his approach to addressing climate change in his documentary and the importance of having civilized debates. He believes it's essential to present the opposing argument's three key tenets in a fair-minded way and then dismantle each point, rather than ignore or dismiss the opposing view, regardless of the other side's behavior. Robson discusses his disappointment with how commentators often use personal attacks instead of addressing the climate change debate's substance. He stresses the importance of not resorting to the "conspiracy theory" of accusing climate skeptics of being funded by oil companies, which is itself a conspiracy theory and shows a weak-minded excuse for not convincing others.
• 00:35:00 In this section, John Robson discusses the importance of welcoming skeptical critique in debates as it sharpens the argument of both sides. He notes that the alarmist mentality has hindered the progress made by skeptics in debunking the climate change apocalypse, but that progress has been nonetheless made. He predicts that the current panic is past its sell date and that it will fall apart soon, making way for a new problem to tackle. There may even be a possibility of a global cooling scare in the future if the Holocene cycles down, but the universe is designed such that truth will ultimately prevail.
• 00:40:00 In this section, John Robson discusses the human impulse to repent and mend their ways or else face divine wrath. He argues that this mindset has shifted towards repenting for climate change and saving the human race from itself. However, he suggests that this mindset is not helpful and can lead to things like climate alarmism and intolerance of dissent or questioning. Robson also discusses the history of radicalism and liberation movements, and how it's hard to predict what will come next, but we need to focus on getting through the current climate hysteria first. He also criticizes the hypocrisy of dismissing those who question climate science by saying they are not climate scientists.
• 00:45:00 In this section, John Robson argues against the notion that only experts should have a say in public policy. Robson believes that a fundamental idea of self-government is that the common sense of the average person is sufficient to unravel big questions. Experts often mislead themselves and others, and the wisdom of crowds drives democratic self-government. Robson encourages citizens to be informed, use their common sense, and not be silenced by those who claim to have more credentials. While being courteous and thoughtful, Robson says it's important to speak up because the truth will prevail.