The Reference Frame: Sean Carroll, money, and science

But that doesn't prevent Carroll from talking about corruption of science and mention a $10,000 prize for a good article on the climate (in a recent era when almost everything written about the climate was pure alarmist pseudoscientific rubbish: this era is fortunately over) as the top example of such a corruption. Is he really unable to see that on the other side he defends, the corruption is greater by 3-6 orders of magnitude? Without the AGW hysteria, climatology in the U.S. would have received at most $5 billion in the last 2 decades but it has received about $50 billion. Subtraction is enough to see that $45 billion was paid as a bribe for scientists to produce stuff that is "consistent" with the AGW delusions. It's $45 billion of corruption: this amount is directly linked to climatologists' talking about a climate threat. Sean Carroll prefers to see a $10,000 journalist prize for a great objective article on the climate that has probably never been even paid at all.

Huh? Leaders convene at UN farmers’ forum to tackle climate change challenges | JunkScience.com

Say what? A lot of my extended family are farmers and smallholders, others fish commercially and a quick ring-around reveals none sought representation at a UN forum, nor did they discuss the topics with any “representatives” or even get an opportunity for input. Did anyone else affected get any such opportunity? Just who are these “representatives” and who, exactly, are they representing? What opportunities did developing world farmers and smallholders have for input on “climate change” and do they give a crap about such nonsense concepts as CAGW?

It “could reap billions” but it won’t cost you a cent, honest! | JunkScience.com

Carbon dioxide indulgences are a rank scam.

Oops! Warming and “acidification” actually really good for copepods | JunkScience.com

Copepods are the preferred prey of cod and herring larvae, inter alia, part of the plankton supporting marine life. Turns out they are actually really fond of warmer and more CO₂-enriched (less starved?) conditions. This was not the impression given by the first (then unrepeated) stage of the experiment. It seems unlikely MSM will try hard to correct the false impression of the first (widely reported) experiment

How To Distinguish Natural Climate Change From Mann-Made Climate Change | Real Science

Natural climate change involves change of 5-12C, which happen continuously.

Mann-made climate change involves half a degree warming – created by massive amounts of spectacularly dishonest abuse of temperature data.