IMG_2375_HDR 3000

Fragments from Floyd

Headlines: Global Warming a Hoax

Winding down the day, I was doing some casual browsing over daily events before bedtime (never a good idea these days unless bad dreams are your thing) and read the headline article on Google News:

Nature Journal of Science Discredits Man-made Global Warming

Out of all the hundreds of links they could pull in on the topic, this was one of the first three chosen for my first page news. Read the first paragraph.

“Nature Journal of Science, ranked as the world’s most cited scientific periodical, has just published the definitive study on Global Warming that proves the dominant controller of temperatures in the Earth’s atmosphere is due to galactic cosmic rays and the sun, rather than by man. One of the report’s authors, Professor Jyrki Kauppinen, summed up his conclusions regarding the potential for man-made Global Warming: “I think it is such a blatant falsification.”

Then, search your favorite engine for “Nature Journal of Science.” Don’t include other articles that quote the “journalistic” account that uses the fake periodical. Keep scrolling through the screens of links. Stop at 10 pages. You’re wasting your time.

Find this “most cited” journal, and please send me all the links. I bet you’ll find about the same number as already-convinced tea party readers who bothered to check for the original article in this august and totally fake scientific journal.

Truth takes a holiday. Welcome to America. And I’m taking Google News out of my bookmarks.

3 thoughts on “Headlines: Global Warming a Hoax”

  1. The post in by Chriss Street seems to fail on several levels. Jyrki Kauppinen doesn’t seem to be a co-author of anything in Nature though there he seems to have planned to publish something in June of 2010 that apparently never did get published. It’s hard to tell, and I gave up researching that angle.
    However, Nature 476, 429—433 (25 August 2011)
    [] (paywall)
    seems to contain the material Street was trying to talk about. This is a bunch of physics techno-talk, but the elaboration at
    [] (possible paywall)
    seems helpful in figuring this one out a bit.

    Hyperbole and beliefs aside, it seems healthy to encourage pursuit of many hypotheses to further understanding of climate and related issues.

  2. I quite agree, but wish our society was more science-literate. It bothers me that those whose intention it is to do so can scam the uncritical thinker with untruths that, even if they pointed to a legitimate peer-reviewed research article, that single study alone would not prove or disprove a trend interpretation based on many hundreds of meta-analysis data points. Science does not work that way, but we live in an age when truth is invented on the spot like improv jazz.

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.