In school we got taught (second-hand by Al Gore) that the polar ice caps would be completely melted by 2012 due to human-incited Global Warming. Just saying.
Her point about previous predictions being wrong claiming they were predictions made by scientists. They weren't. They were claims made by media outlets reporting incorrectly. She compounds this by referring to not listening to predictions about the world ending in 12 years. It's not climate scientists making those predictions. It's politicians and media outlets.
Point 2 again compounds point 1. What do Al Gore, AOC and Greta Thunberg have in common? None of them are climate scientists.
Her argument about the 97% consensus is wrong. Cook et Al didn't do a "Google search". They searched a scientific journal publications website called ISI web of knowledge. They found that 62% took no position on the human impact but concluded that global warming is happening. 34% said the human impact was a factor but not the only factor
The 97% doesn't even come from their own analysis but rather a 2nd phase of their study when they asked authors of those articles that said human caused climate change was true to self rate them .
I've addressed the NOAA/GISTEMP issue before. Needless to say she's wrong on that again.
First it actually refers to a US only data set. Not a global one. 2nd, the entirety of this supposed scandal comes from a blog by a guy called Stephen Goddard. I'll leave you to find how legitimate his analysis is. Suffice to say she's doing exactly the same thing as those she criticises in points 1 and 2. Namely not referring to the actual science but those incorrectly interpreting the science and them making claims.
Point 5 she's actually right. Politicians are idiots.
Point 6 is the same as point 2.
She starts going off on tangents after that.
Is that enough tackling her points?
__________________ Sweating on the streets of Woking
This site collected scientists' positions and predictions. It wasn't just journalists as you claimed.
I should be more clear: you're wrong about her being wrong about scientists making those predictions - scientists, many relevant to the field, made those wrong predictions. You're so wrong (because it's easy to verify/check this point of hers) that I have to wonder why you're stating this. For lulz? To troll the righties?
Other than that, I generally agree with everything else you state.
Most of those Scientists were extremists with half baked data. I don't know why you are propagating a narrative otherwise DDM? Otherwise I agree with everything you said agreeing with Jaden.
Let me rephrase your question in a more accurate manner:
You don't know why I would point out that major news agencies - along with scientists and scientific communities - put out a ton false claims over the years regarding Climate Change?
Just as I expected no one has actually legitimately refuted any of Wheeler's points.
Shocker...
__________________ Paleontologists have tried to turn Archaeopteryx into an earth bound feathered dinosaur. But it is not. It is a bird, a perching bird. And no amount of 'paleobabble' is going to change that.-- Alan Feduccia-a world authority on birds, quoted in "Archaeopteryx:Early Bird Catches a Can of Worms," Science 1994, p.764-765
Watch the video in context of her point #1, read Jaden's incorrect point, then read my point about Jaden's incorrect point, and then comment your informed opinion so you don't have to talk purely in conjecture about the probabilities for the motivations of statements regarding the topic.
I promise, it will take you 5 minutes or less to do this.
How dare you. You just destroyed my dreams and my childhood.
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
Also, so that the goalposts are not moved inappropriately away from where the power is, it doesn't matter if scientists are making wrong predictions.
What matters is if the people who have the power are making the wrong predictions and are using false information or false ideas to make policy decisions.
Let's not move the goalposts to something completely stupid just to win a minor internet argument. If the people in power are making wrong predictions and are trying to get policies made or changed based on their ideas, that's the biggest problem.
If these same people in power are making policy recommendations and decisions based on incorrect scientific information, that's also a problem. But that's almost never the actual situation as almost no person in power makes science-based policy decisions. We do not live in a technocracy or anything close to it.
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.