### JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).

### Handbooks

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX

Think it has been debunked? See here.

# Christopher Booker gets serious about understanding “Groupthink”

We toss the term Groupthink around a lot, but Christopher Booker gets serious about exactly what it is and what it means. He analyzes the “Climate Change” debate through the lens of the original scientific study of Groupthink as published by Irving Janis, a professor of psychology at Yale back in the 1970s.  It’s uncanny…

Obviously we need to understand it so we can preventlimit it.  But Groupthink is also ripe fodder for driving Eco-worriers up the wall as we list the ways — to a T — that they are The Textbook Example. There’s a useful strategy that flows from this. The core tenet is that because believers hold a shaky, fragile idea, they must be aggressively hostile to protect it. So put the boot on the other foot. Let’s ask Believers how they don’t fit the Groupthink mould. Do they welcome debate — go on, prove it.

Richard Lindzen’s introduction:

[Booker] asks how do otherwise intelligent people come to believe such arrant nonsense despite its implausibility, internal contradictions, contradictory data, evident corruption and ludicrous policy implications…

The phenomenon of groupthink helps explain why ordinary working people are less vulnerable to this defect. After all, the group that the believers want to belong to is that of the educated elite. This may have played a major role in the election of Donald Trump, which depended greatly on the frustration of the non-elites (or ‘deplorables’, as Hillary Clinton referred to them) with what they perceived to be the idiocy of their ‘betters’

Booker himself:

…I kick myself that I did not discover the book that inspired this paper until 2014. When I finally came across Irving Janis’s seminal analysis of ‘groupthink’, I realised just how much more it helped to explain about the story I and many others had been following for so long.

### The three rules of Groupthink:

The late Professor Irving Janis analysed what happens when people get caught up in what he termed ‘groupthink’, a pattern of collective psychological behaviour with three distinctive features, that we can characterise as rules.

• A group of people come to share a particular view or belief without a proper appraisal of the evidence.
• This leads them to insist that their belief is shared by a ‘consensus’ of all rightminded opinion.
• Because their belief is ultimately only subjective, resting on shaky foundations, they then defend it only by displaying an irrational, dismissive hostility towards anyone daring to question it.

This paper begins by showing how strongly all these three symptoms were in evidence, right from the start…

Read the whole paper at GWPF, click the book image or go here…

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Christopher Booker gets serious about understanding "Groupthink", 8.9 out of 10 based on 91 ratings

• #
LOL in Oregon

Remember:
They “religiously believe” they are “right”!
So, like the great Oz, they should tell YOU what to do!!

• #
OriginalSteve

When belief replaces facts, science becomes a religion.

• #
STJOHNOFGRAFTON

For example: Evolution. Still a plausible theory but taught, fait accompli, as if it were a scientific law.

• #
OriginalSteve

True. Similar to the CAGW cult.

There also may be a link between Godless socialism and how its poisoned the well in education, and the fact that Socialism will try to reject God in any way it can. Marx famously ( but foolishly ) said he wanted to de-throne God.

People think we live in an “enlightened” world. No doubt we do in some aspects of further understanding of the physical world, but in many respects we’ve replaced one religious superstition with another – namely in our current society, there is an asymmetric “war” between the “Goliath” of the occult-based Godless-driven Socialism that has infested “educated” people and used multiple cowardly vehicles of deliberate cultural change to attack the core of the Wests belief system, and the simple but powerful reality of Christianity. No wonder they hate Christianity….

In one way, we have replaced mud-hut dwelling witch-doctor style superstition that the West seems to think ts above ( coz its “educated” ), with another foolish climate-based witch-doctor style superstition, based on a lemming-like pursuit of the CAGW cargo cult by “educated” people……

The irony is that now honest simple people who can read and call out the Emporers New Clothes, can mentally out-gun educated fools…..

“For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God’s sight.
As it is written: “He catches the wise in their [ own] craftiness.”
( 1 Cor 3:19 )

• #
Graeme No.3

The original idea of Darwin has been modified, especially by ‘punctuated’ evolution. yet plausible, yes, far more so than man made global warming.

• #
Harry Twinotter

STJOHNOFGRAFTON.

Really? Are you disputing the scientific theory of evolution? What’s your alternative to evolution?

• #

1. Merely a point of order: one has every right to dispute a scientific theory without providing an alternative.

2. Darwin didn’t pioneer the theory of evolution. He pioneered the theory of evolution by natural selection.

• #

correct and correct.

On point 2. Evolution is the observation, natural selection is a proposed mechanism to explains the observation. The observation and the term evolution to describe what was observed, precede Darwin by a long time.

On point 1. Ignoring this point is why there are so many dozens of theories of climate with all the new physicses that they require. So many who don’t agree with the consensus can’t abide doing so without having a crack at explaining it themselves.

• #
Leo Morgan

Similarly a point of order, Darwin gets less credit for, but also pioneered, the theory of evolution by means of sexual selection.

• #

When opinion replaces evidence,
consensus replaces knowledge.

When consensus replaces knowledge,
science becomes religion.

When science becomes religion,
Naomi Oreskes becomes Professor of Majority Opinion in Earth Sciences at Harvard.

—Mohandas K. Gandhi

• #
• #

Can you give the chapter and page the quote is from?
It will save me a painful trawl.

• #

Found it – page 269.
I must admit, when you quoted it, I thought it was a perverse bit of your satire. But with Oreskes, straight quotes are more perverse than the most perverse satire.

• #

Rest assured, perverting the course of science will be viewed as a very serious crime indeed at Science Nuremberg. (You know, when we finally get serious and are in a full-on scramble to limit the damage done to science by these b@stards and we have some sort of tribunal… blah blah blah).

I was going to say that “Groupthink is a hanging offense in the special epistemology of science,” but I didn’t want to get a bunch of irate letters.

So let me be clear: that’s just a figure of speech. The judges as Science Nuremberg, when they don their black caps, will obviously give Ms Oreskes the choice of guillotine, scaphism or the wheel.

We may be skeptics, but we’re not savages.

• #
tom0mason

LOL in Oregon

Umm, I’m not sure. What does everyone else think?

• #

LOL in Oregon,

yep, and you must never audit behind the curtain

• #
Gordon

Interesting, and who would have thought that so many think like that. Worse then a bunch of kids in preschool.

• #
Ted O’Brien.

Very like a bunch of brats. But I hope my grand kids’s pre school operates at a higher level.

It’s surprising if just one paper from forty five years ago tells us this. A good time to dig it up, though!

It’s all about ignorance and the quality of dissemination of information.

• #
• #
William

But didn’t they say that the reason the seas aren’t rising as they predicted was because the extra weight of the water was causing the seabed to sink?

I do wish alarmists would get together and get their stories straight. Sea levels are either rising catastrophically, or they aren’t.

• #
Allen Ford

Sea levels are either rising catastrophically, or they aren’t.

Rising, yes,

catastrophically, emphatically, no!

• #
sophocles

… and that’s the catastrophe

• #

… and that’s the catastrophe

Too true.

It’s hard to get a man to understand he’s not drowning if his salary depends on not understanding it.

To quote The Fear Is Palpable:

I’m not suggesting The Scientists™ don’t fear for the future. Of course they do! Their fear is palpable.

‘What if climate change appears to be just mainly a multidecadal natural fluctuation? They’ll kill us probably …’

• #

William,

yes, but they don’t need to get their stories straight because a key feature of such cults is amnesia. They literally don’t remember that they were ever at war with Oceania. That’s why historians pose almost as much threat to them as scientists do.

• #
William

True Brad – ocean floors sinking is just the latest excuse that will either be reinforced or forgotten as required. You are right that amnesia plays a part – if any of the Chicken Litles ever remembered the original AGW predictions, they would soon realise they had been taken for a ride. Useful idiots to the alarmist cause all.

• #
peter

If that ABC report was science, it would have to be one of the worst attempts at science I’ve ever seen. They admitted that they devised a computer model to get their estimates (predicted sea-level results). We already know that computer models are bloody hopeless at accurately predicting anything to do with climate. It was based on ocean thermal expansion(fair enough, I guess and they guessed), melting mountain glaciers (trivial) and melting Greenland and Antarctic glaciers (not happening to any great extent). Not directly on CO2 levels anyway? What the…?

They estimate that over 300 years (300 years? Really?) oceans will rise 0.7m (23cm/century) if we bust a gut, destroying our economies to cut CO2 emissions. If we do absolutely nothing about CO2 emissions, oceans will rise 1.2m (40cm/century). Why bother? They even talk about a 20cm rise/5 year period if peak emissions aren’t dealt with? That’s 4 metres rise per century completely overwhelming all their other estimates?

If that’s science, God help us.

• #
peter

If that ABC report was groupthink, which group was it? Imbeciles?

• #
tom0mason

peter,
I believe the correct term is ‘numbeciles’ this being a contraction of ‘neurotic’ and ‘idiot’.

• #

tom0mason,

IHTCY but a numbecile is a dwelling, house or other abode belonging to an anaesthesiologist.

• #

IHTCY but a numbecile is a dwelling, house or other abode belonging to an anaesthesiologist.

No never! An anesthesiologist administers ‘numbecile’ to those insufficiently spry to escape. Yust try to diagram either! Spills over unto da sauce!

• #
Glen Michel

Who s Bll Laurance? Never heard of him.

• #
PeterS

Very interesting except it’s not the complete story – there are two distinct ideologies or groupthinks that are now polarised more than ever since the last major US crisis in the 1860′s. It’s just around the corner, meaning it’s only a decade or so away. The clash between these two ideologies, which can be loosely summarised as between the extreme left and the extreme right, or between socialism and nationalism, is clearly already showing early signs of happening in the US foreshadowing what is going to happen on a much larger scale later on. So I would modify the picture above with a mirror image where another group is walking over another cliff in the opposite direction with a massive spring joining the two groups. As the two groups walk over the cliff they will spring back and collide with an explosive force the likes we haven’t seen for a very long time. History repeats.

• #
Clint

PeterS, I’m not certain the ideological division is so precisely binary. The Leftward drift over the last two decades casts previously normative central right values, as ‘extreme’ right. Stabilising societal dampers like Church and community have been undermined to near irrelevance. ‘Community’ is used as a standard word by the Left to foster compliance. Added to the vitriol and bile spewed by the Left as standard fare, free speech and normative values are being intimidated and legislated out of existence. The strident narrative of anthropogenic climatism bizarrely feeds the self-absorbed, uncritical anthro-ego-centrics at the same time providing a surrogate for religion and a Trojan horse for the policies of globalism. The latter seems possessed and driven by a globalist elite and their invested corporate and financial players, desirous of mastery and capable of playing all sides of the binary ideological game, furthering their interests through Left or Right actors. In reality, there does not appear much left after this multi-dimensional polarisation across multi-axial political and social spectra, except … that small clutch of independently minded individuals who desire a large portion of personal autonomy and self-responsibility, small government, prosperity, quality educators and education, and reliable, trustworthy security. Herein lies classical liberalism and a promise of future renewal, if they can just remember the lessons of history. http://www.learnliberty.org/blog/what-is-classical-liberalism/

• #
OriginalSteve

Its worse…the UN is attempting to re-create society in its own image, i.e. Godless Communism.

As a Christian, we are rather tuned to religious aspect of things, and the UN makes no attempt to hide that it hates Israel, which is the birthplace and anchor of Christianity and does seem to clearly hate Christianity, as it stands in the way of what seems to be its drive to implement Occult agenda of imposing un-Godly ( i.e. demonic / New Age ) rule over the planet and will enslave all humanity through the process by redefining society throiugh its smooth but deceptive words, as traditional Churches are sidelined through legalization of things like gay marriage etc, which IMHO will likely devlove society, not enhancing it, but importantly for the UN, these societal fractures have “enshrined” an undermining of Christian teachings through “enshrinig” anti-Christian laws and attitudes, which then favours Communism and brainwshing of youth through their smartphones and equally ignorant/apathetic/clueless parents.

Christians openly talk about the 2nd Coming of Jesus, in fact if you look at whats happening now with a significant convergence of prophectic events, its shortening the odds all the time.

• #
OriginalSteve

Missed a few full stops in my comment above…please apply at your discretion…..

• #
Clint

Absolutely OriginalSteve! I inadvertently omitted Christianity or perhaps wider Judeo-Christianty, utterly persona non grata with the blossoming NWO, fostering a multi-dimensional polarisation across multi-axial political and social spectra. The time and opportunity to bear witness is upon us.

• #
PeterS

Indeed OriginalSteve. However, I would not assume that the coming world power will be based necessarily on communism. It could just as well be the other extreme, or something totally different. In any case the end result will be the same so it’s not so important to try and figure out what it will be based on. Time will solve that question. One thing is for sure – Satan and his two cohorts will be behind it. According to scripture they will be very liked by many to begin with as they succeed to create a short period of peace and calm. Watch what happens to Israel in the meantime – it will be the bellwether of what’s to come.

• #
PeterS

No it’s not purely binary. For me to explain it in greater detail would require me to write a book. Perhaps I will one day but then again a lot has already been written so I would be doing nothing really new. I like to keep things simple though from experience. It’s not as complicated as most people think. In fact it’s very simple a child can understand it. As adults we often makes things more complicated than we need to. That’s why I don’t believe much in conspiracy theories. For starters we don’t need to. Back to the point – yes it’s not binary but for the purposes of demonstrating how the world is heading for a crash and burn scenario it’s enough yet again.

• #
Kinky Keith

We need to Take Australia Back.

Take it away from Trumblism, and restore honesty and community interest to the dealings of all who run government for us.

Any deviation from the common good should be immediately prosecuted.

From both sides of politics we have seen huge amounts of money moved overseas to a “special committee” of the U.N.? The transfer of these funds seemed to be very dodgy when given space in the media and the chronic obsession with using elected status as a tool to create “opportunities” must be stopped.

People are elected to look after the interests of the community, not themselves.

So, because of group think and “the illusion of debate”, we have a community unable to vote themselves out of trouble.

And we are already in trouble and headed deeper unless there is massive public enlightenment.

Not likely soon.

• #
Gazman

I first heard of the term Groupthink in 2009 upon reading an editorial from the CEO of a small super fund that I was with at the time. He referred to it in relation the the GFC. He related a story that apparently the Queen asled of a senior British economist, ” how did this be allowed to happen” (the GFC)? His response was that “nobody saw it coming”. And this is a consequence of groupthink, that people become blind to something obvious right on front of them, sometimes inadvertently, sometimes willingly.
The climate change scam is a clear example of everything that makes groupthink so dangerous.
There are other examples, in particular Darwinism, but I fear that might be too much for many to contemplate. I have seen too many times people with whom I have solid agreement on the groupthink of climate change glaze over in blind rage as they are triggered by any challenge to the greatest deception of the modern age.
Cue outrage…

• #

Groupthink is a collectivisation of fight-flight, a way of helping groups survive and even like themselves enough to want to survive. Look at Richmond.

Then someone realised groupthink could be used to make people believe in Upholstery in Space or any old thing. They can even reverse groupthink and make a group hate itself enough to give up on survival. Who needs white hetero human males when there are so many alluring lamp posts eligible for marriage?

• #
• #

I encourage everyone to take the time to click through on the link to rare historical photos that RAH has provided us.

There are so many times that I don’t click through on links but, for some reson, I clicked through on this one. I don’t regret it.

It is a imple photo, powerful, thought provoking, a concise encapsulation of meaning. Even though I have now clicked off the link, the old black and white image is already burned into my mind and I won’t forget it. Thanks RAH.

• #
RickWill

Ditto – very powerful. I have copied the image for future reference.

That image simply portrays the potential destructive nature of any unquestioned consensus.

• #
RAH

David and Rick. Your very welcome and I suggest you save it unless you can remember enough to search it up yourselves in the future. You’ll almost certainly have your own occasions when you can to use it to make the point as I have several times in the past.

• #
R2Dtoo

RAH is one of the most clear-thinking respondents on the climate science websites. He delivers a truck load of common sense and well-thought-out comments on a daily basis. I never miss his posts. Thanks RAH!

• #
RAH

Why thank you! I do not have the education in science and math to mix it up with the heavy hitters or to try blogging on the subject of climate. But I do what I can and have learned a great deal over the years just reading and commenting on the climate blogs. However when it comes to certain historical and military subjects I’ll go toe to toe with the best of them.

• #
Clint

August Landmesser, an extraordinary man who lost everything including his life, and who by 1936 in this photo would have appreciated the direction in which the Nazis were headed, … along with everyone else. Book burning was frequent since 1933, though the Kristallnacht of November 1938 when the Jewish pogrom became ruthlessly overt had yet to occur. Given the disappearance of much of German academia to the US and UK (Hitler’s Gift to the World) and the increasing militarisation of Germany, who by July 1936 were committed and involved in the Spanish Civil War. It would have been hard to miss the signs of things to come. The ready or reluctant compliance of all but this man highlighted the grip of Groupthink, doubtless promoted by threat and fear, implicit and explicit.

By 1945, 50 million people were dead worldwide, Hitler and his Nazis attributed with 12 million. One hopes and prays that the present disintegration is not the same road to the same destination, Hell.

• #
TdeF

Groupthink seems to apply mainly to organizations like the ABC, government departments, big companies like Google. In Australia where many people work independently, up to 65% of people self employed or in a few person business, there is no pressure to conform. I suspect that the vast majority of people try to ignore issues like Climate Change until and so far as it affects them directly. As with electricity prices, insurance costs, petrol costs.

That’s the evil in the massive carbon tax which is the RET. It does not affect petrol for people’s cars. If it did, if petrol prices reflected electricity prices, there would be a massive electoral backlash. So the RET is framed cunningly as not a tax legally and not about Carbon Dioxide and hits the hidden tax agents, the electricity retailers. It is not shown on the bill. Politicians deny it exists except as a notional percentage, not a direct tax on the people.

Probably illegal, the RET is not groupthink on Climate Change, but a very cunning grab for billions which forces middle men to pay windmill operators and solar panel buyers for nothing at all, the right to do what they are doing. It is not based on the science beliefs of anyone but on the political beliefs of a few public servants. It is a massive ripoff on ordinary Australians and relies not on groupthink but on ignorance.

In fact, I suspect most Australians do not believe in Climate Change or have any idea what it is. Organizations like the CSIRO make their living from it. So do universities like JCU, as Peter Ridd can testify or the late Bob Carter. I do not know about the BOM, but suspect they are objective scientists and it is only the management and political activists who believe such nonsense, to justify their existence in a time of computer run measurement and analysis.

However if you work in a big company like QANTAS or the public service, belief in Climate Change is mandatory, essential for promotion. If you do not believe in it, you must shut up or you will not have a career. The people at the top insist you are politically correct and that is enforced. You have to speak in whispers.

• #
TdeF

The only other group are doctors, science qualified but understandably very busy people. They experience massive groupthink in their jobs. As well, they do not have time to investigate the facts for themselves. Doctors are often Greens on principle. As one friend says, he only has enough time to read headlines. They also tend to believe that news channels and organizations tell the truth, when former news channels like the ABC, CNN have changed into the most activist manipulators of public opinion. Activist political groupthink runs both the BBC and Australia’s ABC. Conservative views utterly excluded and not to be tolerated. Similarly with many umbrella organizations like the AMA and even the Royal Society who want to please their politician friends.

• #
Clint

It is beyond belief that ‘doctors’ (those with an undergraduate degree in medicine and surgery) who are taught the elements of critical thinking and scientific appraisal, who understand the laws of evidence should be such participants in GroupThink. It has cost me a good friend, a consultant physician and PhD who won’t see beyond a headline in the Guardian. The worst without doubt are the policy-based evidence practitioners, the risk mongers in public health who live, indeed thrive on the deeply toxic relationship between, funding, policy, threat, fear and regulation, which seems to come so easily to them.
There seems a ray of light. With the rise of ‘precision medicine’, personal genomics and disease markers, their days and the days of large cohort heuristics seem numbered.

• #

In fact, there is no war on hydrocarbons or “fossil” fuels. There is a War on Coal, and quite a deadly war if you are Australian.

The 26 million dollars taken by the Sierra Club, from Chesapeake Energy and other gas producers, for their campaign against coal were only meant to be a start. If someone had not blown the whistle in 2010 there were at least another 30 million coming immediately.

Remember: Coca Cola isn’t worried about wine or tea. It worries about Pepsi Cola. And Big Oil/Gas worries about coal, not whirlygigs. Green energy = gas + diesel sales. It also involves burning lots of trees, biomass and waste gas.

And the biggest loser globally if the War on Coal succeeds? Hint: it’s the country which wakes every day to hot news on Barnbaby’s squeeze, Aldi specials and fake reality shows.

Wakey-wakey, Australia.

• #
Dennis

One of the worst examples is Green Group Think.

• #
William

I am just having a little trouble with Green and Think without a negative in the same sentence.

• #
sophocles

That’s easy: just throw out “think”

• #
tom0mason

Dennis,

Maybe Green Group Think Fantasists.

• #
sunsettommy

Sebastian over at NOTRICKZONE is a perfect example of one who is deep into Groupthink:

New Paper: 1,407 Contiguous U.S. Temperature Stations Reveal NO WARMING TREND During 1901-2015

He made the first comment in the thread ignoring almost the entire blog post in the process, Tony who has a TINY spot by a link reference in the post gets attacked:

“SebastianH

So you’ve gone full Tony Heller today. Noted

Have fun in conspiracy bubble land with all these made up claims.

This is what no warming looks like?

Before you ask, no you won’t get “counter points” from me (most of what is posted here isn’t new and has been discussed before, look it up). The expectation that skeptics can come up with anything and others have to spend time fact checking everything they say, is a bit ridiculous. A form of denial of service attack if you will.

So long.”

• #
TdeF

Amazing, to think that anyone would worry about a move over 100 years of +1C in an average across the year? There was a time you could not read thermometers to 0.1C and 1C makes not a jot of difference to anyone or anything.

So is there anywhere on earth where 1C would make a difference? Actually, yes. The average at the North Pole is 0.0C, possibly because of the massive water buffering at the melting and freezing point of water with latent heat energy cost and release both ways, melting and freezing. So of course the spruikers choose this as the most threatened place and Polar Bears as the victims of coal.

It is interesting how coal is the focus of the anti Western activists, anti Western values, anti Western religions, anti Western culture and anti Western democracy. They have learned to leave diesel, petrol, gas alone. Diesel is now a hero. Very Green. Strange. In this they are supported by the diesel, petrol and gas groups who are just thrilled that coal is the only enemy. For now.

Now it is doubtful for a country which used to self sufficient in energy whether we even have our own petrol and diesel. We are being turned into an open cut mine and gas reserve for the rest of world. No local processing. No independence. As was pointed out this week, if war came to Australia we would run out of fuel in a few weeks.

• #
TdeF

Never forget the original 1988 scare. 0.5C in ten years. Never happened before. Therefore 5C in 100 years. CO2 is the problem Armageddon, based entirely on the roughest of absurd correlations as proof.

Now 30 years later, it is disproven by simple observation but groupthink keeps it going.
As Daniel Hannan said, it takes 20 years for such a scare to die down. Currently tens of thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands of people in Australia are now dependent on Climate Change for their living. There are people doing PhDs on Climate Change which was invented long before they were born. The question it is to undermine their faith, their self belief and their careers.

• #

Read Soros manifesto, his so called ‘Open Society Reforming
Global Capitalism,’ or my serf 50th Edition post on Soros, re
instilling the necessary value system to create the ‘encumbered’
individual at his own University, the Central European University
and at the progressivist Bard College, both high in his list of
grantees. Soros’ Education for Utopia, the complete student group-
think make-over.

Soros has spent more than $400 million world-wide to promote left- liberal, and in some cases extremist causes. One course at CEU incorporated lessons for the Occupy movement, there’s a video of the Program Director for the Environmental Sciences, Tamara Steger, with a slide behind that says ‘How to occupy people’s heads with your message.’ • # Mary E It’s marketing. Get the word out any way you can to sell the idea. And it’s propaganda, which is marketing without a degree. Soros is good at marketing, he offers up cash rewards for buying his “product.” Group think has been around for as long as there have been groups of people – once it was helpful, it held a small group together tight enough to survive. It also helped keep a leader in power – shamans used group think to keep their power, their position, chiefs and lords used it for the same. THEY are bad, WE are good. As civilization progressed, so did group think. We have the same issues – liberals aren’t entirely wrong when they decry the racism and bigotry they see, it’s group think, a long held idea that skin color equals position in society, ability. But the liberals are victims to group think themselves, holding that only their ideas are Good the rest are Bad. We all are liable to group think. It’s probably so ingrained that we can’t see it; it allowed a small number of hairless apes to survive and grow into what is now the dominant species on the planet. It will also kill us all, if we can’t learn to pen it up or evolve past it, like we evolved past the “reptile brain” we all still have in the base of our skulls. It still influences us, but it doesn’t control us. Group think is dangerous, yet we are drawn to like-minded people and hold thoughts and values and ideals that make no sense outside the group, that have no proof beyond the thinking of the group. CAGW has one dominant central tenet – mankind has caused unnatural warming, and has done this by putting too much CO2 into the air. That is all that is needed to be part of the group. Members can believe any other silly old thing, proven wrong or not – and use any means to promote the central idea, moral or not. As long as they hold to this simple core idea, they are part of the group. Other people, the believers, the masses, are like a preacher’s flock, unanointed ones who must be led to the true path and encouraged to remain on it. Skeptics, well, we are the heretics, the non-group and non-flock that must be cast out and denied, punished for our disagreement with the central tenet. Or, if you prefer, use the communist model, where party members lead the peasantry along the road to a perfect society and dissenters must be shut down, quieted, jailed or killed. It isn’t just average, everyday group think, it’s group think with a mission. Soros is just a cog in the machine. So is the IPCC and the UN. There is no secret cabal, no leader, no real cohesion beyond the belief in and fear of CAGW. What started as a science project with over-tones of environmental restoration has turned into an out of control avalanche, or a rock slide. There are – like in the churches, in the communist parties, in any large body of ideology, those who are greedy and see opportunity, those who hunger for power and see opportunity, those who just see a cushy job, and the those who are true believers. Most are just caught up in the flow and spread of the moving snow, rocks, whatever. When it is clear – when the dust settles, when the sliding slipping downward flow finally hits a wall or peters out, that’s when the group think may break, become just another little blip in the long list of stupid stuff mankind believed in. That will take irrefutable evidence that CO2, and thus mankind, is not causing the temps to rise – which might not happen until another LIA hits. My faith in believers seeing the light and turning away from the CAGW temple is small. I can hope that those being dragged along rebel, see that the theory is wrong and poorly constructed as well as blindly adhered to and put an end to the mess before someone does something stupid (like seeding the atmosphere with light-blocking particles, hooboy, what an idea) and I can spread the word of sites like this and others to help that hope along. But group think is powerful, and hard to disrupt. • # OriginalSteve I disgree that there isnt some form of organization…it seems way too integrated, to be haphazard. • # Mary E Humans look for patterns, for reasons, and secret or overt, find them. The IPCC and the UN are organizations, have agendas, yes. Secret cabals? No. Just a bunch of power-hungry greedy-gusses seeing a way to get money and fame and maybe a shot at the head table at home. They’d turn against each other in a minute if it meant more for themselves. At first it was a small group, trying to suss out the science and proofs and meanings. Look here, we have a problem, and this appears to be the cause. Seek proof and we shall reward you. If proof is not found, the rewards cannot continue, and we shall know the Truth. The lesser beings said, we shall find proof you are right, and be loyal to the Truth and the Cause. We need more money. The higher beings said, let us test these theories, see if there is even a problem, and what is truly causing it. Truth is not science. We need more time. The politicians in the group said, money beats time. And sent out the marketers, the propagandists, the lesser politicians. Knowledge was pooled, and the survey said – Save the Planet. For the Children. Equality in All. Down with Profit (except, of course, profit in Green Ideals.) Children and young adults, easily swayed, were brought to the cause. Greedy politicians and sad-sack pretenders to science who wished for glory and idealists who did not think beyond their own ideals were brought into the fold. The word was bought and paid for, and spread far. Green corporations were bred to take money and pass it through to those who saw Profit, the Almighty One. Those who truly wished to “save the world” were pushed back and given new toys and money to continue their work in proving the world needs saved, to keep them occupied while the politicians and new corporations worshipped at the altar of greed. Heretics were banned, cast out, vilified. The money paid for many things – luxuries, travel, and most importantly, Marketing and Propaganda to spread the Word – Science. The Word spread far and wide, and those who had little learning in the ways of science trusted Science and did not know that was no science at all. And so the Word spread faster, and farther. And thus was born the new age, the Green Age, of hypocrisy and double-speak. But even now there are those who see beyond the veil and struggle to educate the world about science and against the Word, which is marketing and propaganda and belief. As the world turns, and oceans fail to rise, glaciers fail to disappear, rain continues to fall, winter continues to happen, the Word is failing. And as the little petty chiefs begin to argue amongst themselves, as the fiefdoms turn away from their own preaching and use the Evil Coal for power and profit, as the wonderful thing known as Information brings all this to light, the Word fails. • # From my reading, there’s a whole lot of integration goin’ on. ‘Clique,’ ‘ camp,’ ‘coterie,’ ‘cabel,’ call it what yr will .. Clinton Foundation, Saul Alynski Rules for Radicals, Concerned Scientists against Global Warming, pushing protest and legislation to constrain free speech, its a movement alright under the guise of furthering democracy, and Soros embraces it all, making large donations and lobbying, much of it under the lap.under the lap. Soros shuts down free speech via orchestrated protest movements that adopt violent tactics. These anti-free-speech assaults include the 2017 May Day Riots across the US, the California University, Berkeley, the violent protests \in February to prevent Milo Yiannopoulos speaking at the University, and include the Anti-Trump Inauguration protest in Washington. in January 2017.A left wing organization called Rise-Up Org. that claimed responsibility for the May Day violence that erupted across the US on May 1st,2017, is a left-wing organization financed by Alliance for Global Justice, one of Soros’ top 150, seven figure grantees. It is also funded, indirectly by Tides Foundation, number 3 on OSF grantee list. Tides Foundation gave AfGJ$50, 000, according to the AfGJ 990 tax form.

• #
Extreme Hiatus

I agree – “there’s a whole lot of integration goin’ on.” And long term planning.

Unfortunately I don’t see it ending even with “irrefutable evidence that CO2, and thus mankind, is not causing the temps to rise – which might not happen until another LIA hits.”

They’ve already shifted away from just The Warming to a Climate Religion which covers everything. Even the hiatus is extreme. Like going back to the sun worshipping days. The next big cooling will just ‘prove’ that we – the little people that is – offended the climate.

Think it will take something very major to change this and the cure could be much worse than this disease.

• #

A – G – E – N – D – A. *

* ’tweren’t never about the science.

• #
PeterS

I listened to the interview of Cormann, acting PM, on 2GB this morning ans he’s a perfect example of groupthink. He went on and on about how great it is to follow the leftist ideology on climate change and declined to admit the obvious solution presented by Jones to our energy issues is to remove the barriers to new coal fired power stations by stopping the subsidies and policies favouring renewables. This is one of many reasons I will never vote for the Libs ever again. Clearly the only party even just contemplating of voting for is AC.

• #
Dennis

Prime Minister Abbott said in 2015 that he will not stand for socialism masquerading as environmentalism.

His government launched a campaign and bill to abandon the 23 per cent RET created by a previous Labor government with subsidies of taxpayer’s monies to boost private sector profits.

The hostile Senate blocked the RET bill and reinforced the 23 per cent RET which Labor now wants to increase to 50 per cent and the government wants 40 per cent RET.

It is all about UN based politics and socialism objectives, the latter has been admitted by UN Officials, and others.

But as covered at this blog there is substantial wealth creation involved for the “cronies”, it is a disgrace.

• #
Clint

The proto-global supra-national State operating the UN Transformational Agenda has capture Australia. Done deal. It’s over down-under. The only way the Marxist charade will collapse is either with the disintegration of Europe or the UN. Neither could survive without the other.

Australia signs Framework Agreeement to boost cooperation with European Union

The signing of the Framework Agreement marks the beginning of a new era of strategic cooperation between Australia and the European Union (EU).

The agreement will enhance cooperation between Australia and the EU to tackle challenges in foreign and security policy, sustainable development, climate change, and economic and trade matters. It will encourage closer links between leaders across government, business and civil society. (aka. UN Transformational Agenda – implementation date, 2030)

Foreign Minister Julie Bishop said, “Australia and the EU are natural partners. We share common values and cultural heritage, and are committed to free and open markets.

“The Framework Agreement builds on our already close ties and aspirations for deeper cooperation and will strengthen Australia’s bilateral relationship with the EU, in an era of unprecedented global development and volatility.”

Vice-President Federica Mogherini said, “Europe and Australia are geographically very far apart, but we work together on a daily basis on the global stage, as like-minded partners and friends. Ours is a partnership of opportunities: bringing our populations closer together to facilitate exchanges, trade, and sharing knowledge.

“The agreement we have signed today reflects how strong our ties are already and how they will become stronger through our increased exchanges and cooperation, for the sake of our peoples and of the world.”

The agreement will guide future engagement between Australia and the EU and complement work towards launching negotiations for a comprehensive, high quality free trade agreement.

• #
Dennis

I cannot recall the Turnbull Party mentioning that they signed, Minister for DFAT Julie Bishop signed the Framework Agreement, Agenda 30 during January 2016, during the federal election campaign later that year.

• #
Kinky Keith

Especially like the last paragraph.

I’m particularly concerned about the substantial sums of our tax money the has made its way to the back door operations of the U.N. and Clinton Foundation for wayward boys and girls.

Will our Australian donors be able to tap in to some of this cash later.

J, J or K appointed special envoy for wayward boys and girls.

KK

• #
Will Janoschka

‘Tis just part of Gavin’s new geological age ‘The Adjustocene’.

• #
Kinky Keith

I like it, very potent not like that impotent, non heat trapping gas, CO2.

• #
PeterS

Yes it’s a disgrace. In fact I would go far as to say they have turned their backs on traditional Liberal values and polices only to become a 1990′s version of the ALP. In other words they have betrayed their own principles. That’s why I love to see them completely annihilated at the next election even at the expense of having Shorten as PM. They and the majority of voters need to be taught a big lesson. We might as well anyway since in the long run it would make very little difference on a number of issues.

• #
el gordo

There was clearly a public revolt against the political elites in Washington, giving voice to a populist leader, but in Australia we’ll have to become a republic to achieve that milestone.

I’ll hazard a guess that at least half of the educated middle-class in Australia believe in the IPCC consensus.

• #
TdeF

I would suggest 90% could not care less. Food, rent, petrol, holidays and a job. No one knows why electricity prices are rocketing but there is no carbon tax, is there?

• #
PeterS

One slight modification. You are correct with respect to the “working class” but many are on high paying desk jobs (public as well as private) do not give a toss about electricity prices and other living expenses. Then there are the ultra rich political leaders, company leaders and execs who care even less. As you can see those who are in “control” not only don’t care about the cost of living these days, they are completely insulated from them as their incomes increase much more that the rising costs. Some must be wondering what the fuss is all about. They probably think they should say something like “get over it” and “let them eat cake”. That’s one reason why we are heading for the crash and burn scenario – they do not see it coming, and even those that do they are so wealthy they think they can survive it very well thank you very much. So I bet they would the say “all you plebs out there stop whining!”. Ivory towers are too close to the ground for those so called “leaders” of our society. They are so removed it’s not funny.

• #
TedM

$2.2B subsidy per year. Isn’t that a tax? The taxpayer pays for it. • # TdeF Perhaps the most egregious example of Groupthink was the criticism of the Duchess of Cambridge’s dark green dress, black sash and black handbag. It was not BLACK enough. Therefore she supports abuse. How dare she! You must wear a super expensive black stunning outfit to please the women who have decided that black is the dress code. It has been a long time since a Duchess or the Queen could dictate fashion. Who does she think she is? Even the Queen is attending fashion shows now. Maybe the Royal Family could dress in all black permanently to honour the memory of Queen Victoria? Groupthink. It tells you how to dress, what to think, how to think and above all, to conform. Last year Christopher Columbus and Captain Cook and Lord Nelson suddenly became villainous white male supremacists. Decided simultaneously in three countries and now fact. The real question is who decides what to groupthink, or was this just another amazing coincidence? • # Environment Skeptic In the book by G. I. Gurdjieff, The Tales Of Beelzebub To His Grandson, in Chapter XIII “Why in Man’s Reason Fantasy May Be Perceived as Reality”, Beelzebub has this to say, in part, to his grandson when asked. “MY dear and kind Grandfather, be so kind as to explain to me, if only in a general way, why those beings there are such that they take the ‘ephemeral’ for the Real.” ……….”or, as I should say in their language, they believe everything anybody says, and not solely that which they themselves have been able to recognize by their own sane deliberation.” “In general, any new understanding is crystallized in the presence of these strange beings only if Smith speaks of somebody or something in a certain way; and then if Brown says the same, the hearer is quite convinced it is just so and couldn’t possibly be otherwise. And: “”And in the present case there is no harm in recalling again one of the wise sentences of our dear Mullah Nassr Eddin, who says: ‘Struth! What might not happen in this world. A flea might swallow an elephant.’ • # Environment Skeptic And in : “Chapter XV “The First Descent of Beelzebub upon the Planet Earth” “Besides this chief particularity of their common psyche, there are completely crystallized in them and there unfailingly become a part of their common presences – regardless of where they may arise and exist – functions which exist under the names ‘egoism,’ ‘self-love,’ ‘vanity,’ ‘pride,’ ‘self-conceit,’ ‘credulity,’ ‘suggestibility’ and many other properties quite abnormal and quite….” “Of these abnormal being-particularities, the particularity of their psyche the most terrible for them personally is that which is called ‘suggestibility.’” ….a mild case of hypnosis?…hmmm… • # Extreme Hiatus What should I write here? • # peter Just think, say and do as you are told. Don’t question. Only those in the pay of Big Coal, Big Tobacco and Big W question the “science”. The consensus is “in”. To question is to be a “denier”. That should be enough answer for you. • # Extreme Hiatus Thanks for your guidance Peter. But do I actually need to think too? Thinking is hard and it confuses me. • # Will Janoschka At$100/hr, a good shrink can fix that!

• #
Mark D.

Good shrink is free. Bad shrink does it for the money.

• #

Yous gets no more den ya pay for; if dat!

• #
Dennis

#me too ?

• #
Extreme Hiatus

“#me too”

That could work. Especially if Julian feltcher whatever… without your full consent of course.

• #
Environment Skeptic

…’cut and paste’ normally works

• #
Julian Feltcher

This site analysing Groupthink, what a laugh!

A simpler question would be “In science what is Groupthink?”, the blind acceptance of given facts without question which is what is largely done here on a daily basis, the “factual” links given are often anything but or adjusted to fit the narrative so the echo chamber can be filled.

Some deniers will never repent even when their atmosphere is destroyed beyond repair, next generation please!

• #
peter

What evidence do you have that the atmosphere is being destroyed? Any data? figures? science? Anything at all? Or do you just make bland statements and consider them facts? What facts do you bring to this site Julie?

• #
sophocles

Or do you just make bland statements and consider them facts

Nope. He just dips into his Group Think and out pops an answer. He has no idea of its veracity.

• #
Extreme Hiatus

“Some deniers will never repent”

Repent. Thanks for appropriately putting your views in religious terms. Time to start burning “deniers” I guess… or would that emit too much CO2?

• #
Julian Feltcher

I purposely used that term as bait and it was taken, proving how many “god botherers” here are naturally compatible with real Groupthink!

• #
el gordo

Groupthink is natural and admittedly this blog is presenting a coolest point of view, but we are in desperate need of people like you to sway us over to your side.

Hang around, debate.

Of course you may decide to slink away ‘displaying an irrational, dismissive hostility towards anyone daring to question’ AGW.

• #
Extreme Hiatus

Of course you did. And of course it ‘proves’ what you want to believe. Everything does.

• #
Will Janoschka

Heat them, (including Julian Feltcher) in a partial vacuum (reducing atmosphere) thus making only ‘coke’, exhausting only nice water vapor! Useful for later making steel!

• #

I should add that that calcium carbonate ‘bones’, little improve the steel-making process. Perhaps “cement”, instead. Converting trees/stake to charcoal; likely is more efficient!

• #
sophocles

Extreme Hiatus said:

ime to start burning “deniers” I guess… or would that emit too much CO2?

Supposed “Deniers” are carbon-based so that’s one point that doesn’t need any further discussion.

• #
Clint

Troll Julian Feltcher: A simpler question would be “In science what is Groupthink?”, the blind acceptance of given facts without question …

Sigh. You mean the policy-based and funded ‘science’ like the UN IPCC / Paris Discord, the Groupthink fixation on modelled data? Or the more obvious empirical data that fails to show variance of centennial climate metrics beyond 1sigma, an undetectable anthropogenic global warming signal ? Or the UAE Climategate emails, Or the ‘hide the decline’ or the falsification of the schtick, or the $quintillions of vested interest in the gravy train? The last thing you will see here at this site Troll, is the blind acceptance upon which you appear so happily and ignorantly dependent, and the lockstep Groupthink you so willingly demonstrate. • # Kinky Keith Well put Clint. Obviously Jules hasn’t read much of this blog because if he had he wouldn’t have made the comment about links to made up data. If he had done some homework he would have seen a remarkable absence of links and a significant number ofcomments that are based on real, solid life and work experience or solid academic qualifications in the sciences and engineering. KK • # Annie He is today’s duty troll…I notice there is rarely more than at a time spouting forth. • # Annie Rarely more than one at a time… • # Glen Michel His antecedents are legion! I mean, the same old puerile guff.Thats when you combine a zealot with someone who wants to save the planet. • # Mark D. Julian Feltcher foists the epitome of group think upon us. Twisted as it is in 1984 terms. Good luck Feltcher • # Dave Our Julian is a Qualified Climate Reality Leader in Australia Trained by Al Gore himself! Additional Groupthink training was given to him by the Australian Conservation Foundation! Really over qualified I think! • # Extreme Hiatus Oh my. He may have inhaled CO2 from the Great Man himself! How were we blessed with his visit to this humble site? We are not worthy. Come back Julian. Blessed are the cheesemakers. • # Glen Michel Yes,come back and play pinball with us. • # Kinky Keith Obviously has the science training of the typical Climate Scientists. • # el gordo We’ll never find out if Julian has any scientific knowledge, which is a great pity. • # MudCrab Hand me the net, we’ve hooked ourselves a big one! Leftie Trolls are always such amusing long hanging fruit. They claim that sites like this and their associated followers are massively irrelevant and have no impact on the Good and Correct thinking people, yet they also spend considerable time and effort visiting these sites to attempt to ‘correct’ us. Observe here how Julian not only made the first post, but then hung around to comment on any replies. Seriously Julian, there are Cat Videos on YouTube if you really REALLY need an excuse not to clean the bathroom. People like Julian also go a long way to support the theory that Lefties simply cannot bare to be proven wrong. A typical Leftie as you will remember believes that ‘Everything will be better if only *I* am in charge’. A typical Rightie by comparison believes that ‘my life would be better if everyone else just stopped telling me what I can and can’t do’. A Rightie doesn’t actually feel the need to be ‘correct’ about everything, they just want to be left alone to keep doing what has shown to be successful. A Leftie NEEDS to be correct. Admitting to themselves that they may be wrong brings into question their core mantra of ‘Everything will be better if only *I* am in charge.’ To be shown up as being wrong would openly suggest that everything would NOT be better under their leadership and that far from being a Great Leader(tm) in waiting, they are in fact just another insignificant being left behind by those successful Conservative kids. • # sophocles They have a juvenile mind set where they absolutely have to have the last word. • # TedM Ever heard of the carbon cycle Jules? Ever read any of the thousands of papers that do not support the CAGW hypothesis? Do you have any science? • # robert rosicka More group think from our Kiwi friends currently hosting the climate change subject . New category for cyclones needed . http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-22/new-category-six-cyclone-rating-needed-nz-climate-minister-says/9473574 • # sophocles James Shaw is a Green Politician which means he’s a loose mouth with legs. He’s embarrassing. • # “He’s embarrassing”. Absolutely spot on, Sophocles! Can you believe that in New Zealand we have Cabinet Ministers that are not even elected? – that are “List MPs”? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Shaw_(New_Zealand_politician) The sooner we are rid of Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) voting, the happier I’ll be. http://www.elections.org.nz/voting-system/mmp-voting-system A Muslim man (of all people), after our elections last year in which our current Government, much to their own surprise, found themselves in power due to the machinations of one man, the current Deputy PM, said (paraphrasing). “These Kiwi elections are most interesting! Everyone is going out and voting. And then they are counting the votes. And after they are counting the votes, after two weeks are passing, one man man is telling the country who has won!” You couldn’t make it up… • # sophocles FijiDave said: Can you believe that in New Zealand we have Cabinet Ministers that are not even elected? – that are “List MPs”? Of course I can. I voted. I like MMP: nobody gets a sufficiently large majority to do anything incredibly stupid. They can still do stupid things but not really big bad ones. • # sophocles There there Julian. Stop worrying your little brain, that wetness you feel is from all the washing it’s had. You’ll get over it, eventually. • # Extreme Hiatus Groupthink comedy gold. Monty Python – Life of Brian – You are all individuals (44 second clip) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QereR0CViMY • # OriginalSteve Latest Silliness-du-Jour from the Oz “Pravda”….. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-22/new-category-six-cyclone-rating-needed-nz-climate-minister-says/9473574 …says the NZ Climate Change minsiter …..presumably with a straight face…not sure how he does it… “Scientists may need to create a sixth category for cyclones as climate change creates more extreme weather events, according to New Zealand’s Climate Change Minister. James Shaw said there had already been category five storms that would have been given a higher rating if one was available. A category five cyclone, as defined by New Zealand’s MetService, has winds speeds between 215 and 230 kilometres per hour. This differs from category five cyclones in Australia, which have winds exceeding 280 kilometres per hour. Mr Shaw’s comments at the Pacific Climate Conference in Wellington come as some New Zealanders affected by Cyclone Gita have been told it could take up to a year to clean up the region.” ….and of course the kicker….. “Mr Shaw said scientists were linking extreme weather events to climate change and the stronger cyclones were challenging weather classifications.” • # sophocles OrgSteve said: says the NZ Climate Change minsiter …..presumably with a straight face…not sure how he does it… Easy: he’s similar to Julian Felcher: a true believer but a little more intelligent—he managed to ride into Parliament as an MMP list MP rather than winning a seat. He’s got a management consulting background, and a Master’s degree in sustainable development and business leadership, so he’s way light on science/engineering of any sort. IMHO, he’s a dangerous idiot. • # sophocles A Master’s degree in sustainable development and business leadership Umm, how to plunder a company repeatedly so no-one notices and it can be gotten away with. • # OriginalSteve Spot on…..Youve made my day…. • # sophocles Mr Shaw said scientists were linking extreme weather events to climate change and the stronger cyclones were challenging weather classifications.” He’s wrong. Scientists are not linking extreme weather events to climate change at all. Scientists including those owned and operated by the IPCC, are unanimous that there is no link. Only CC activists are making that link. So to all those who believe the same as Shaw, go to Youtube and watch The Sun and Storms to see what really may be causing storms. Assuming for now, that the Sun creates cyclones, then some rough lumpy solar wind knocked some thunder storms around to form Cyclone Gita, Cat 1. Gita’s backside was booted a couple of days later to force her from Cat 1 to Cat 4 by a rare “Double Whammy” from the only sunspot [2699] on the face of the sun at the time. Of course, when it went off, it had Planet Earth full face in its sights. However, Climate Change is a dangerous diversion and distraction. If a single sunspot on the face of the sun can set up destruction on that scale, then there is something wrong with our guardian magnetic field.The #1 Risk to Earth could be an immanent magnetic pole reversal, not climate at all. [Julian: all these links are for YOU!] Enjoy and learn • # sophocles A little clarification of the above post, #19.2, is required here now this is out of Moderation (my thanks to whomever it was ): There are two links in the second to last paragraph where it looks like one which has line wrapped: Link 1: text:to force her from Cat1 to Cat4 (which got nicely scrambled!) should be: http://spaceweather.com/archive.php?view=1&day=10&month=02&year=2018 Link 2: (“by a rare Double Whammy“) is to an article at Sci-Am and is working, (or it should be when Sci-Am’s server comes back from maintenance.) Sorry about that. Enjoy. The links in my above post and the one I’ve corrected here, will show you, Mr Feltcher, the direct control of terrestrial “extreme” weather by the sun. “It’s the Sun, Stupid.” CO2, Climate Change, and puny industrial man do not feature, at all. Watch and read and you just might be able to start fixing your blindingly ignorant arrogance and your arrogant ignorance. • # . Of course, when it went off, it had Planet Earth full face in its sights. Could you explain that effect a bit more? Please consider proper time, rotations, and angles involved. Did the mass of Earth’s Moon sans own magnetic field have an effect? • # sophocles Just to make it clear: New Zealand was not hit by tropical cyclone Gita. NZ was hit by the storm (rains and wind) Cyclone Gita had decayed into. In other words: the remnants of Gita. It’s a big difference. • # And being one of those that have lived through TCs in the tropics both at sea and on land, I can attest to the fact that the remains of TC Gita were exactly that – the remains. Although much damage was done to properties within 10 or 15 kms from here in Upper Moutere, it would have been far, far worse had we been hit by the real TC Gita at full force. • # Ian1946 The Orwellion principle of doublethink is also appropriate especially people who say renewables are cheaper but prices must rise. The ability to have contradictory thoughts but see no problems. An advanced branch of hypocracy. George Orwell’s 1984 covers the concept very well and we who do not adhere to their mantras are guilty of crimethink or thought crime. The book is available as a free Kindle download if you have not read it I suggest you do. • # TdeF The term denier is useful for group think, classifying and abusing people without addressing their actual objections to group think. In fact it casts you as subject to group think, just a different group, the denier group. Groupthink people have a real problem that other people do not need to be told what to think. Safety in numbers, in the herd, against the deniers. The great thing being labelled a denier is that it is not clear what you are supposed to be denying, not that it matters. My particular denial is not that global warming or global cooling is happening, has always happened but that it is man made. Rapidly rising oceans. Clearly not true. Surely no one believes it now. Rapidly rising temperatures? Not after the last few winters. Extinction of specific animals? No, that seems to be false. Coal is the problem, not diesel, petrol, gas? That seems absurd. Trillions of dollars of windmills will affect CO2. No. That’s busted at huge expense. Worthless windmills. The 50% CO2 increase in the last hundred years is man made. No, that’s busted too. Radio carbon date the CO2. It’s all new CO2. CO2 hangs around for thousands of years. No, the half life is 14 years. There’s not much left for a denier to deny. There is simply not any argument for man made global warming. Deprogramming the entire ABC/SBS/BBC/CNN will take a generation. Best that they are left in peace to retire with their beliefs? It is too late for them to change their minds, to admit what is now clear. Where else can Tim Flannery go? • # Julian Feltcher The term denier is useful for group think, just like the term ‘Warmist’ that is heavily used on every anti climate change site? (Deniers do not deny it is warming or climate changes thus it is demeaning, while warmist is an accurate description of people who see only warming in some way no matter what) CTS • # Mark D. It is obvious that Warmists exist so I agree. What is your contrary stup*td point? • # TdeF Agreed. However warmist it is meant to summarize a position and is not a derogatory label. Denier has overtones of the Holocaust denier, moral outrage, lives lost, countries in flames and history rewritten. No one really denies that temperatures change except for warmists who insist the little ice age did not happen, the medieval warming, the Roman warming. The warmists also insist that the current small warming is tipping point, runaway, out of control, current and disastrous and man made. After thirty years, at a cost of$1.5Tn a year, none of this is true.

• #
TdeF

Agreed. However warmist it is meant to summarize a position and is not a derogatory label.

Denier has overtones of the H*locaust denier, moral outrage, lives lost, countries in flames and history rewritten.

No one really denies that temperatures change except for warmists who insist the little ice age did not happen, the medieval warming, the Roman warming. The warmists also insist that the current small warming is tipping point, runaway, out of control, current and disastrous and man made. After thirty years, at a cost of $1.5Tn a year, none of this is true. • # Extreme Hiatus Julian – Really enjoy your posts. I like this term: “anti climate change.” Is that like anti planetary rotation? By the way, the term “Warmist” is essentially just descriptive of the CAGW view. I think it actually sounds kind of cute and cuddly. But the term “denier” is not only a false label but is also loaded with negative historical connotations so it is a smear – as you may know. • # TdeF Denier is a deliberately perjorative term. The opponents of the extreme view actually agree with the planet warming, so it is just a collective noun. It is not intended to influence opinion or prejudice the discussion. Basically the IPCC was formed in 1988 as a UN body supported by the World Meteorological Association. It was not formed because of Global Warming. It was about Climate Change. It is a political body whose reports are edited by politicians, not scientists. Consider Christiana Figureres, part of the Figueres family which has run Costa Rica for that period. The first job of the IPCC was to find a problem to justify their existence and funding. Man made Global Warming was discovered immediately and needed fixing. Lots of cash and attention. Is it true? Are these ‘scientists’ wrong? Remember the 400 million Indians who were going to die by 2030 from lack of water because the glaciers were rapidly melting. Not a shred of science, data or evidence. The casual comment of a tour guide was the only source of this science fact. How did they explain this? A typist error in the date. No warmists they are. Self justifying rent seekers on a massive scale who call anyone who questions their ‘science’ deniers. • # TdeF Part has much more below, from Judith Curry. The IPCC is a purely political body run by politicians for their own reasons. Socialism masquerading as environmentalism, to quote Tony Abbott. • # sophocles Julian: Like breeds like. My dictionary defines denier: [n] One who denies a religion.. Those we now call Warmists first used “Deniers” as a derogatory term by which they dismissed sceptics so sceptics started using Warmists to dismiss the climate Cargo Cultists and pseudo-scientists. Warmists is somewhat politer, less derogatory, therefore better mannered. Otherwise it’s Tit for tat and you have no grounds for complaint. Think about that. When you insult those who come here, you set yourself up for attack, so Learn, grow up and wise up. • # el gordo Julian I’m a member of the Denialati and proud. A quick question, do you think CO2 indirectly caused the recent coral bleaching? • # MudCrab I for one are always running into ‘Warmists’ who go on and on about how Man Made CO2 is ‘Freezing the World to Gosh!’ Actually no I don’t. I run into ‘Warmists’ who constantly tell me we are all going to fry, how children will no longer know what snow is and how yesterday was the ‘Hottest Day on Record(tm)’. You want to stop being labelled as ‘Warmists’ then stop talking about Global Warming. Seriously, you Group Thinkers really cannot stand people disagreeing with you. It’s almost as if you are by displaying an irrational, dismissive hostility towards anything we suggest or attempt to explain. • # Annie Accidental green thumb there…it was the mod’s comment that I was thinking of, not Julian’s. • # sophocles Well, Annie, go correct it with two red thumbs: one to cancel the accidental green thumb and the second to be the red thumb you meant to administer . I won’t tell! • # Dennis TdeF research the shareholders of Keshik Capital Pte registered in Singapore. And then the shareholders of Infigen Wind Resources of Australia. Consider that the share value at Infigen increased markedly after this government “adjusted” the electricity supply market prospects. • # My particular denial is not that global warming or global cooling is happening, has always happened but that it is man made. The various temperature measurements that change from day to day are very much ‘man-made’ via incompetence! I again DENY; (via observation), that the academicians supervising such adjustment express the intelligence, training, skill, or integrity; to do any adjusting whatsoever! All the best!-will- • # Ian Hill It’s why the Titanic sank on its maiden voyage in 1912. • # yarpos Orwell had it right. Al Gore = Big Brother IPCC = Ministry of Truth • # pat very interesting: 3 Jan: Judith Curry: Manufacturing consensus: the early history of the IPCC Short summary: scientists sought political relevance and allowed policy makers to put a big thumb on the scale of the scientific assessment of the attribution of climate change. Bernie Lewin has written an important new book: SEARCHING FOR THE CATASTROPHE SIGNAL:The Origins of The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change The importance of this book is reflected in its acknowledgements, in context of assistance and contributions from early leaders and participants in the IPCC… The focus of my summary of the book is on Chapters 8-16 in context of the theme of ‘detection and attribution’, ‘policy cart in front of the scientific horse’ and ‘manufacturing consensus’. Annotated excerpts from the book are provided below. The 1970’s energy crisis In a connection that I hadn’t previously made, Lewin provides historical context for the focus on CO2 research in the 1970’s, motivated by the ‘oil crisis’ and concerns about energy security. There was an important debate surrounding whether coal or nuclear power should be the replacement for oil…READ ON https://judithcurry.com/2018/01/03/manufacturing-consensus-the-early-history-of-the-ipcc/ • # TdeF Amazing. This from 1996 on ‘peer review’. “This IPCC report, like all others, is held in such high regard largely because it has been peer-reviewed. That is, it has been read, discussed, modified and approved by an international body of experts. These scientists have laid their reputations on the line. But this report is not what it appears to be—it is not the version that was approved by the contributing scientists listed on the title page. In my more than 60 years as a member of the American scientific community, including service as president of both the NAS and the American Physical Society, I have never witnessed a more disturbing corruption of the peer-review process than the events that led to this IPCC report. • # PeterPetrum I started to read this paper by Dellingpole yesterday. It is superb. Well written, logical and easy to read, he has done an incredible research job on how the whole “groupthink” on global warming was deliberately started and fostered by a very small number of people for the deliberate purpose of working towards a Marxist world of UN one-world government. So much good stuff to talk about at the next dinner party with the leftist snowflakes. Seriously, it is a must read. • # PeterPetrum Harrumph – Booker, not Dellingpole. • # Kinky Keith Thanks Peter. • # R B My 10c worth. GW has appealed to those who have the same egotistical drive to be able to get the hard stuff right as scientists do. A proper scientist will consider themselves right if everything adds up regardless if anyone else agrees. A superficial one likes to be surrounded by 97 other people who agree in case they wrong. Can’t risk standing out when you’re wrong and standing out when you’re right is not worth it. • # PeterS It has been said many times that real science is based on a proper analysis of the evidence and not by majority decision or propaganda. The reality though is much science today is based on false or misinterpreted data. I have no problem people following and believing something that’s not true as long as it doesn’t require taxpayers to fund them, or the nation’s economy to be hamstrung by some political ideology. For example, I have no problem flat earthers having their own stupid belief system about the earth being flat. They do it on their own time and money without having an impact on the rest of us who do believe the earth is not really flat. The same should apply to the CAGW cult, which is based on false and misinterpreted data. To this end I now despise all scientists who do know better but remain silent on the matter. They are just as much to blame as those who perpetrate the cult. Imagine if the flat earthers were much more influential and convinced our schools to teach it as fact. I’m sure a significant proportion of the scientists around the world would come out and rip it to shreds in no time at all and put a stop to it. Of course we know no funding is lost in doing so but when it comes to CAGW even those scientists who have nothing to do with climate science and are funded for a completely different field of science are scared to speak out on the cult and their dishonest works for fear of losing their grants. It’s so pathetic and I’ve lost all respect for such scientists. • # Will Janoschka For example, I have no problem flat earthers having their own stupid belief system about the earth being flat. They do it on their own time and money without having an impact on the rest of us who do believe the earth is not really flat. What has belief got to do with it? Such is but the subtle intersection of plane and solid geometry or physical dementionality! “Own time and money”; ha,ha,ha! Have you actually paid for a land survey, (Professional flat Earthers INC)! The ones that must say K acres, more or less. These folk get your money by learning\understanding that the summation of interior angles of a X sided feature projected on a surface of zero curvature is always 2X·90° ±ZERO! 6 ·180°= 720° 4π radians 5 ·180°= 540° 3π radians 4 ·180°= 360° 2π radians 3 ·180°= 180° 1π radians 2 ·180°=-180° one line/reciprocal, zero area (more or less)! 1 ·180°=-360° point! reversal to frequency domain (1/t) 1 imaginary 1/π² radians 2space cycles power/solid angle orthogonal! 2 imaginary 1/π³ radians 3space cycles orthogonal. EMR energy density in 4-space! Et-cetera, et-cetra! Is there any wonder why academic meteorologists\climatologists get EMR so very, very backwards? All the best!-will- • # pat further to comment #24 as regards the oil crisis, which began in October 1973. Jan 2001: Guardian: Saudi dove in the oil slick Sheikh Yamani (Saudi Oil Minister from 1962 to 1986) tells Oliver Morgan and Faisal Islam why a production cut would hurt everyone – even Opec Special report: the petrol war His voice quickens further when he reminisces about the era of great oil diplomacy in the Seventies and his contemporary, former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. ***At this point he makes an extraordinary claim: ‘I am 100 per cent sure that the Americans were behind the increase in the price of oil. The oil companies were in in real trouble at that time, they had borrowed a lot of money and they needed a high oil price to save them.’ He says he was convinced of this by the attitude of the Shah of Iran, who in one crucial day in 1974 moved from the Saudi view, that a hike would be dangerous to Opec because it would alienate the US, to advocating higher prices. ‘King Faisal sent me to the Shah of Iran, who said: “Why are you against the increase in the price of oil? That is what they want? Ask Henry Kissinger – he is the one who wants a higher price”.’ ***Yamani contends that proof of his long-held belief has recently emerged in the minutes of a secret meeting on a Swedish island, where UK and US officials determined to orchestrate a 400 per cent increase in the oil price… Last year Yamani said that the oil prices were destined to crash in the long term and, the world would never use up the last drop of oil, because it would not need to: ‘The Stone Age did not come to an end because we had a lack of stones, and the oil age will not come to an end because we have a lack of oil.’ https://www.theguardian.com/business/2001/jan/14/globalrecession.oilandpetrol Yamani’s “Stone Age” quote has become well-known over the years, but his “extraordinary claim” re “the minutes of a secret meeting on a Swedish island” etc were ignored. Guardian surely could have discovered more about this meeting. when I first read this article, I immediately looked up the Bilderberg Group(think?) meetings, which MSM were still pretending didn’t exist: Bilderberg/1973 was held at Saltsjobaden, Sweden. Grand Hotel Saltsjöbaden hosted the annual meeting of the Bilderberg Group in 1962, 1973 and 1984… The islet is sometimes referred to in Chinese as Kang Youwei Island – Wikipedia Saltsjöbaden) note it was held before the oil crisis which began in October 1973. The twenty-second Bilderberg Meeting was held at the Grand Hotel Saltsjiibaden in Saltsjiibaden, Sweden, on 11, 12 and 13 May 1973 under the chairmanship of H.R.H. The Prince of the Netherlands. much of interest in the following, but it’s lengthy. Sheikh Yamani’s name comes into play near the bottom of page 27 and it’s worth reading much of what follows. a lot of it will sound familiar. it’s an odd format, but can be copied and pasted. DOWNLOAD: File:Bilderberg-Conference-Report-1973.pdf ITEM 1: THE POSSIBILITIES OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF A EUROPEAN ENERGY POLICY, AND THE CONSEQUENCES FOR EUROPEAN-NORTH AMERICAN RELATIONS p55: III. What Can Be Done about the Demand Situation? A. The validity of consumption forecasts A German participant asked whether the energy forecasts on which the discussion had been based were necessarily inexorable. With so many Western countries approaching zero population growth, would consumption indeed continue to grow as predicted? Could not the public be educated as well to renounce certain comforts to which they had become accustomed, such as air conditioning, overheating and the proliferation of private transportation?… B. Economic, political and social aspects of demand reduction A Swedish participant said that a reduction in the demand curves from present projections was “largely a question of political will”. The market had to be manipulated by a price mechanism -taxes or other -and certain physical restrictions and infrastructure investments, such as in public transport. If solutions were not found, industry would be the first sector to be severely hurt… p56: Several participants referred to the particularly depressive effect which a reduction in energy consumption would have on the vulnerable less-developed countries, who were just now poised to make new advances on the social and economic scale. The consensus was that special preferential arrangements were warranted to guarantee the “third world” import and consumption levels sufficient to sustain its momentum toward development…. https://wikispooks.com/wiki/File:Bilderberg-Conference-Report-1973.pdf • # Another Ian More “Previous Identification of Groupthink: Part of Why the Public Doesn’t Believe in Global Warming” https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/02/21/previous-identification-of-groupthink-part-of-why-the-public-doesnt-believe-in-global-warming/ • # Extreme Hiatus That’s a great post. Lots of Climategate emails revealing the settling of the science and all that. • # pat comment in moderation re 73 oil crisis/Bilderberg. supporting material: Wikipedia: 1973 Oil crisis The 1973 oil crisis began in October 1973… By the end of the embargo in March 1974,[2] the price of oil had risen from US$3 per barrel to nearly $12 globally; US prices were significantly higher. The embargo caused an oil crisis, or “shock”, with many short- and long-term effects on global politics and the global economy. It was later called the “first oil shock”, followed by the 1979 oil crisis, termed the “second oil shock.”… End of the Bretton Woods currency accord On August 15, 1971, the United States unilaterally pulled out of the Bretton Woods Accord. The US abandoned the Gold Exchange Standard whereby the value of the dollar had been pegged to the price of gold and all other currencies were pegged to the dollar, whose value was left to “float” (rise and fall according to market demand)… Because oil was priced in dollars, oil producers’ real income decreased. In September 1971, OPEC issued a joint communiqué stating that, from then on, they would price oil in terms of a fixed amount of gold. This contributed to the “Oil Shock”… Over the long term, the oil embargo changed the nature of policy in the West towards increased exploration, alternative energy research, energy conservation and more restrictive monetary policy to better fight inflation… Alternative energy sources The energy crisis led to greater interest in renewable energy, nuclear power and domestic fossil fuels… The Brazilian government implemented its “Proálcool” (pro-alcohol) project in 1975 that mixed ethanol with gasoline for automotive fuel… Israel was one of the few countries unaffected by the embargo, since it could extract sufficient oil from the Sinai. But to supplement Israel’s over-taxed power grid, Harry Zvi Tabor, the father of Israel’s solar industry, developed the prototype for a solar water heater now used in over 90% of Israeli homes… ***Many in the public remain suspicious of oil companies, believing they profiteered, or even colluded with OPEC (citation needed)… OPEC soon lost its preeminent position, and in 1981, its production was surpassed by that of other countries… The world price, which had peaked during the 1979 energy crisis at nearly$40 per barrel, decreased during the 1980s to less than \$10 per barrel. Adjusted for inflation, oil briefly fell back to pre-1973 levels…
Part of the decline in prices and economic and geopolitical power of OPEC came from the move to alternate energy sources…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_oil_crisis

Wikispooks: Bilderberg/1973
Participants
Among the 1973 participants were the CEOs of Royal Dutch Shell, British Petroleum (BP), Total S.A., ENI, Exxon, as well as significant banking interests and individuals such as Baron Edmond de Rothschild and David Rockefeller, as well as Henry Kissinger, then US Secretary of State…
Agenda:
1. The Possibilities of the Development of a European Energy Policy and the Consequences for European-North American Relations

The paper noted “the continued requests for price increases from Middle East producing countries, accelerated by the devaluation of the dollar.”…
https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Bilderberg/1973

• #

I have come to call this dis-ease Groovethink.Since the explosion of social media or antisocial media it has become apparent that to seem all cool and groovy is just like so literally progressive.So un old white male.This attitude from so many of my adolescent Thirty plus year old niece’s….Like..

• #
Kinky Keith

Yeah.

Cool man, like??

While driving and looking for something to listen to I occasionally have found a kiddy radio program on JJJ or other government sponsored site that puts over stuff for the listeners, like, and has a very groovy backbeat behind the words of wisdom sprouted by the DJ.

Greg, your description of this mind entraining groove is just so,,,, there: you know.

After listening to the latest BBC piece how global warming was absolutely out of control, I almost believed that cagw was all caused by old white men.

Sad to say, that this is as close to reality as many people come, when they hear a cool DJ reading a piece that rubbished others in their community.

Does that mean that we no longer have a functioning community??

Quite possibly.

KK

• #
robert rosicka

OT not group think but the same mentality .
South Australia and high power prices are to be a thing of the past just ask Nick!

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-22/sa-election-xenophon-power-retailer/9475216

• #
el gordo

Scientists discover climate change tipping point in mid winter.

‘While the Eastern United States simmers in some of its warmest February weather ever recorded, the Arctic is also stewing in temperatures more than 45 degrees above normal. This latest huge temperature spike in the Arctic is another striking indicator of its rapidly transforming climate.’

Washington Post

• #
Kinky Keith

That sounds really dangerous.

Maybe they could pipe some of that heat down to Washington and Virginia, to name but two states that were frozen over, where they have only snow and ice to warm them.

• #
philthegeek

• #
el gordo

Blogs are organic in structure, where people of like minds gather, so it maybe slightly tweaked in the framing.

Have you seen this shocking news, your side must be crowing?

https://sunshinehours.net/category/arctic-sea-ice/#jp-carousel-12795

• #
philthegeek

Nothing for anyone to be happy about there eg.

• #
• #
philthegeek

apparently its all deep state inspired fake news and crisis actors dont cha no??

• #
el gordo

Is this weather or climate change?

‘Bureau of Meteorology forecaster Andrew Bufalino said Brisbane usually hovered around 27 degrees this time of year.

“Cooler-than-average conditions are to stick around for next couple of days, then we will get a pretty strong ridge push up the coast and that will keep temperatures well below average once again,” he said.

“So for the daytime grab a jacket and a doona for overnights,” he said.

“There is no hot air mass to pass over us so enjoy the cool weather while we have it for the brief amount of time.”

Weatherzone

• #
Kinky Keith

The David Archibald meeting in Singleton tonight had a very small rollup of only 8.

Many will be pleased to learn that there was a complete absence of groupthink in those attending. Everyone seemed to be approaching the issue from different perspective: certainly a plus.

Hello to Geoff who only a few days ago was expressing concern here about driving the putty road.

The local politicians would be breathing a sigh of relief that none of their constituents seemed to be present and concerned about the closure of Liddell.

KK

• #
John PAK

It’s easier to join a group of people who think a bit along your own lines than collect data and produce a balanced opinion on all facets of a topic. Most of us will take a side rather than admit that we don’t actually know enough about it to comment.
I upset lots of people by saying that Dr Jonas Salk’s vaccine didn’t work because we all learned that polio was largely eradicated by vaccination yet Salk himself said that it often caused the disease it was intended to prevent and he with-drew it from use. It’s quite hard work tracking down the original polio data and forming an opinion that differs from the popular group-think because just about every source parrots the same incomplete story.
It’s actually quite okay to not hold an opinion on something or say that you are still gathering information on that one.

• #
Ruairi

A quote from A.A.Milne.
” The third-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the majority.
The second-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the minority.
The first-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking.”

• #
Lionell Griffith

Booker gives a devastating clinical analysis of the climate catastrophe group think crowd. Yet, comes no where close to identifying the cause. Without the cause, it is nothing but a recitation of history and consequences. Good but not enough.

A question that needs a serious answer is “Why are humans so vulnerable to group think and stick to it even as it destroys their ability to live and thrive?” To an interested outsider it looks to be shear madness leading to self destruction. However, something so pervasive and ingrained must have natural law behind it making it all but inescapable.

I suggest the following hypotheses:

1. Since the first hominid group, the survival of the group depended upon the individual giving unlimited allegiance to the group with the group providing the traditions and practices that the individual needed to survive. Group was first and the individual really didn’t long count for much. Hence, the group evolved to sustain the group. It became embedded in the genetics of the specie.

2. Technological advance and the acquisition of knowledge apart from mere repetition of tradition was a rare and almost accidental thing. If it was new, it wasn’t natural because it violated tradition. The inventor paid dearly for daring to be so bold. Often with his life. Eventually the new became part of tradition. Hence there was hundreds of thousands of years of stagnation between the small advances toward civilization. This too became embedded in the genetics of the specie.

3. Not so very long ago, there was a group formed who allowed the individual to think about thinking. Today we call it ancient Greece. Two individuals stand out in particular and in opposition: Plato and Aristotle.

Plato held we cannot really know anything beyond the dancing shadows on a cave wall. Reality existed but knowledge of it was beyond only a special few who just know. How? Somehow.

Aristotle held that the individual can know and described a process by which that was possible: a thing called logic being applied to experience. Only one thing was in the category of “just know”: a thing cannot both be and not be in the same way at the same time. Knowing depended upon that principle not being violated.

Plato’s approach followed the path embedded in our genes. Easy, no effort except finding those who “just know” and following them. Aristotle’s approach depended upon an active and continuous choice to follow his method. It was hard and unforgiving effort to maintain.

4. Fast forward to the time that Aristotle’s method was discovered and applied. Eventually, the individual could think of something new, profit from it, then live and thrive. Then Kant came along and “proved” that you really can’t know reality as it is. You can only know what is in you head. Truth as such cannot be known. The best that one can know is what the group knows. Poof. All the way back to prehistory tribal existence.

5. Over a century ago, Post Modern Philosophy and Post Normal Science arose out of the ashes of Plato and Kant and infected all aspects of a then booming technological civilization based upon Aristotle’s method. Once again, truth is not knowable. The only way of knowing is “just know”. The group knows but the individual can’t. Hence the genetically embedded aspects of group think comes back in full force. Group think becomes the path of least resistance.

Hence the new age religion is climatology and imagined climate catastrophic that, if left unchallenged, will make it impossible for humans to live and thrive on earth.

The bottom line is to die is easy. Do nothing and it will happen. To live takes effort doing the right things in the right way. To thrive takes doing the right things in the right way persistently, deep. thoughtfully, and on purpose.

Hence, I conclude we don’t need better people in government, we simply need better ideas in the people that are good enough for the people to follow them. The better people in government will happen because the people will be better from the get go.

• #

Interesting, thanks Lionel

• #

Oops! With two ‘l’s’. Sorry!

• #
Lionell Griffith

You are welcome.

No problem about the dropped “l”. I am glad you noticed. I have an ample supply of them left over from the many times they have been dropped from my name.

The down side is that dropping the extra “l” changes the pronunciation of my name from Lion-ell to Li-nul. That changes the meaning from “a little lion” to “a lie about nothing”. I believe I have a good bit more to offer than an empty lie.

• #
ivan

A question. Has anyone managed to download the pdf? I have tried and get nothing.

• #
tom0mason

Here’s a direct link to the file.

• #
ivan

Thanks tom, I finally managed to download it on my tablet – strange that non of the computers here could do it.

• #
tom0mason

So glad to see that we all agree that ‘groupthink’ is bad.
So let’s start a movement to make ‘groupthink’ illegal, seconded — ah good.
Motion carried!

• #
Wilbert

Groupthink is a concept that was identified by Irving Janis9 that refers to faulty decision-making in a group. Groups experiencing groupthink do not consider all alternatives and they desire unanimity at the expense of quality decisions. Learn more about groupthink and then complete the interactive exercise at the end of the discussion.

Conditions Groupthink occurs when groups are highly cohesive and when they are under considerable pressure to make a quality decision.
Negative outcomes Some negative outcomes of groupthink include:

Examining few alternatives
Not being critical of each other’s ideas
Not examining early alternatives
Not seeking expert opinion
Being highly selective in gathering information
Not having contingency plans

Symptoms Some symptoms of groupthink are:

Having an illusion of invulnerability
Rationalizing poor decisions
Believing in the group’s morality
Sharing stereotypes which guide the decision
Exercising direct pressure on others
Maintaining an illusion of unanimity
Using mindguards to protect the group from negative information

Solutions Some solutions include:

Using a policy-forming group which reports to the larger group
Using different policy groups for different tasks
Dividing into groups and then discuss differences
Discussing within sub-groups and then report back
Using outside experts
Using a Devil’s advocate to question all the group’s ideas
Holding a “second-chance meeting” to offer one last opportunity to choose another course of action

• #
Harry Twinotter

Christopher Booker is a journalist…

• #

Christopher Booker is a journalist…

Hokay! Is a “Harry Twinotter” much less? Hirsute aircraft that cannot fly?

• #
Annie

So he is! And you are?….what?

• #
sophocles

A cretinous coprocephalic?

• #
RoHa

For the sake of logic, can I point out that being influenced by groupthink doesn’t make the Warmists wrong. It is possible to believe true claims for bad reasons.

It is the falsehood of the claims that makes the Warmists wrong.

• #
Andrew McRae

It is not possible to be right for the wrong reasons. Ask any lawyer and they will confirm this. That’s because the arguments given for a conclusion are the only reason for believing the conclusion. Some one who gives a false argument is wrong regardless of whether that same conclusion can be supported by alternative means.

• #
Simon

1. Check
2. Check
3. Check
This discussion spectacularly fulfils all criteria for groupthink.

• #

[...] GWPF that attacks the climate consensus as being a product of groupthink. Deniers are promoting this “paper” like it’s very important, cartoons and all. [...]

• #
sophocles

Come and lie down.

Now, start at the beginning and tell us all about when you first started feeling so threatened by people not agreeing with everything you believe in?
Does it frighten you?
Why are you so scared?
Yes, from the beginnning …

• #

Over at Cliscep, Jaime Jessop looks at Bob Ward’s reaction. He accuses the GWPF of being made up of sexist, old white men.

What I find interesting is how Bob Ward starts his piece.

On 20 February, the Global Warming Policy Foundation launched a new pamphlet at the House of Lords, attacking the mainstream media for not giving more coverage to climate change ‘sceptics’.

The pamphlet is GLOBAL WARMING : A case study in Groupthink. Ward neither links to the GWPF or to the pamphlet, so the reader cannot see for themselves that this is a clear piece of misinformation.