In order to effectively use advocacy as science, influential governments and academic institutions must first be captured. This disturbing script is exactly what climate alarms have executed in recent decades, turning respected public institutions into advocacy-driven money-cows. [emphasis, links added]
By converting objective scientific investigations into politically motivated fears, these institutions effectively gain endless taxpayer funds.
When NASA's Goddard Space Research Institute (GISS) was founded in 1961, it was committed to rigorous, unbiased research on planetary atmospheres and astrophysics. Its founder Robert Jastrow envisions a scientific power that objectively and reliably contributes to the exploration of space and environment in the United States.
Unfortunately, today's GIS has become almost unrecognizable, becoming increasingly similar to a politically motivated advocacy organization rather than a bastion of objective science.
Why is this dramatic change needed? The answer is simple but shocking: Without fear of the imminent climate disaster, taxpayers’ research funds will quickly dry up.
As a result, shockism ensures ongoing funding, defending endless grants, inflated salaries and a wide range of bureaucracies. This is what the dangerous reality of taxpayers face today…the elaborate disguise masks the necessary science.
Gavin Schmidt: Scientist or Climate Crusader?
Since Gavin Schmidt took over GISS in 2014, the institute has transformed from a scientific entity to an activist center. Schmidt co-founded controversial real-world websites, often blurring the line between unbiased research and advocacy.
Under his leadership, GISS exchanges often highlight sensational claims about imminent climate catastrophes, strict historical context, and uncertainty within climate models.
This activist-driven approach ensures that taxpayer funding is based on fear-based narratives rather than objective scientific discoveries, enriching the rigor and empirical accuracy of careers based on anxiety and shock, rather than science.
climate.gov: Institutionalized fear of taxpayer fees
NOAA climate. gov represents a taxpayer-funded climate alert. The website always lists exaggerated, worst-case scenarios as inevitable outcomes, often overlooking or minimizing the evidence and uncertainty of contradictions.
The website’s shocking content is primarily used to foster public anxiety rather than to educate citizens on balanced and scientifically powerful perspectives.
By choosing sensational scientific exchanges, climate. This communication approach dangerously politicizes climate science, bringing public funds into sustaining anxiety-driven narratives.
Financial Network of Climate Bureaucrats
NASA GISS, CLIMATE.GOV, and the USGCRP, the producers of the influential National Climate Assessment (NCA), are closely linked to each other financially and ideologically.
These entities permanently have exaggerated threats to justify their existence, constantly generating shocking and unrealistic climate predictions.
Instead of an objective analysis, their reports systematically ignore the evidence that contradicts terrible predictions, further cementing their narrative and funding flows (exploring disturbing details).
James Hansen and the Birth of Climate Alert
The sirens’ turn traces the roots of James Hansen’s influential Congressional testimony in 1988. His dramatic statements permanently embed fear-based narratives into government climate science, obscuring earlier studies that showed the least trend.
Hansen's testimony initiates a strong strategy of ongoing urgency that ensures ongoing public funding (Revealing Hanson's influence).
IPCC’s Global Confirmation Bias
The Intergovernmental Climate Change Group (IPCC) further institutionalized this bias, highlighting only negative climate outcomes while systematically ignoring the potential benefits of increased carbon dioxide.
This intentional bias toward information ensures that global funding flows remain secure, perpetuating alert narratives rather than fostering a comprehensive scientific understanding (learning more about this global bias).
Climate cost myth: Debunking the economic alert
Climate alarmers often claim that climate-related disasters will escalate economic impacts.
But even NOAA data consistently show that weather-related economic losses do not continue to rise, which contradicts the assaultist claim.
However, public funds continue to pour into the narrative of alerts, inflating bureaucracy and salaries (see data on these claims).
Irrational Fear is written by climatologist Dr. Matthew Wielicki and has been supported by readers. If you value what you read here, consider subscribing to and supporting the work there.
Reading for rest in irrational fear
