Climate change and confirmation bias: what would it take to change your mind? – Telegraph Blogs

[Warmist Tom Chivers] Prof Muller's conclusion is that not only is the world warming (2.5C warmer than pre-industrial times, 1.5C warmer than 50 years ago) but that it matches perfectly to the raised levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
...
I've decided who to trust, and it's mainstream scientific opinion: the Royal Society, the Royal Institution, Nasa, the US National Academy of Sciences, the US Geological Survey, the IPCC, the national science bodies of 30 or so other countries. And that gives me a possible route out of the confirmation-bias trap: I have, in advance, outsourced my judgment to expert bodies...What I want to ask those sceptics who, like me, are not professional climate scientists is: what's your way out? You are as trapped by confirmation bias as I am. You will not be able to disinterestedly search through the torrents of information, false and true, on the internet and elsewhere: the more you look, the more you will confirm your own beliefs, because that's what we do. Since the design of the human mind makes you an unreliable judge, what evidence would it take to change your mind? Who, in short, do you trust? If you look at your own beliefs, and realise that there is nothing which could shake them, then you, as much as the hard Greens, are practicing a religion, not seeking empirical fact.

Were the minds of Gore, Mann, Hansen, etc designed to make them reliable judges?

Billions in assets wiped out. Temperature doesn’t flicker | Herald Sun Andrew Bolt Blog

Or put it another way. The carbon tax has wiped $1.5 billion from the value of state-owned generators in NSW. What has it done to the value of other power assets around the country - and what difference will this massive write-off make to the temperature?

Answer: billions lost for absolutely nothing.

Sceptical about the right things | Herald Sun Andrew Bolt Blog

Jonah Lehrer tells us to be less sceptical of claims of man-made climate change:

One of the sad ironies of scientific denialism is that we tend to be skeptical of precisely the wrong kind of scientific claims. Natural selection and climate change have been verified in thousands of different ways by thousands of different scientists working in many different fields.

He should have urged us to be less sceptical of his claims about Bob Dylan:

A STAFF writer for The New Yorker magazine has resigned and his latest book has been halted after he acknowledged inventing quotes by Bob Dylan.

Not a sceptic. Not our champion. Not conclusive. But warmists cheer | Herald Sun Andrew Bolt Blog

ABC presenter Jon Faine today introduced Richard Muller as “one of the world’s leading climate sceptics” who’d seen the light. The “champion” of Australian sceptics who now are shattered by his defection. The guru who’d stopped Australia from accepting what the rest of the world had already concluded - that man was heating the world dangerously.

To his credit, Muller went some way in the interview to denying the billing, but not far enough.

But what was most telling was that Faine had clearly made no attempt to check his propaganda points against the facts. He asserted as fact what was false, and seized on what was useful but not true.