Dr. Don Easterbrook: Data, Dogma, and Discovery

by on May 6, 2013      

in Academia, Environment, Science & Technology, Trending

Don Easterbrook

Don Easterbrook

Dr. Don Easterbrook returns to the show after recently testifying before the Senate Energy, Environment & Telecommunications Committee in Olympia, Washington. His testimony – supported by 50 years of work in climate change and jam-packed with verifiable facts that stand to alter the picture many have ingested about climate & weather – offered mind-blowing insights about the difference between data and dogma. An honest comparison of Dr. Easterbrook’s information with the propaganda about climate change will inspire even the most ardent climate change environmentalist to take note. Dr. Easterbrook was subsequently attacked by his own institution (among others), who ran character assassination pieces in Associated Press to frame him as a quack.

After producing over 30 segments on climate change, it is clear that the facts are totally accessible, understandable, and cannot be manipulated to suit a political agenda. Join us as we invite Dr. Don Easterbrook and astrophysicist Dr. Gordon Fulks to discuss recent events and lay out important, current information supporting a whole systems approach to climate change clarity.

Play

{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }

1 Rebecca July 3, 2013 at 7:17 pm

Kim,
I am running into the same ‘consensus view’ bullying with electric utility “smart” meter green-washing. I am so grateful for all of the climate shows that you have assembled. Both controversies are related. The environmentalists have been misled to believe that the ‘smart’ grid will result in less energy use and less carbon emissions and will therefore reduce global warming. It is such nonsense. I have learned so much from the experts you have interviewed. These are the real heroes of our age. I am so inspired. Bravo!

Reply

2 Ian Richardson May 29, 2013 at 5:08 am

It iss so unfortunate that the young people of today are firmly of the opinion that we are causing the climate to change and that carbon dioxide is bad. One of the reasons for this lapse from open minded analysis of data, is that this dogma is now firmly entrenched in the exam syllabi of many institutions. When, as a teacher, I am forced to recount this dubious dogma for students to regurgitate in exams, I feel helpless to go against the ideological trend that is so prevalent.
Maybe the climate alarmists might be correct, but until they address the many valid points raised against it, many of their actions are inexcusable.
I fear there will be a whole generation that will reject true science in favour of dogma.

Reply

3 brad pear May 17, 2013 at 12:44 pm

Some of the above individuals reek of the Unreliable Sources crowd. I smell a rat, Kim beweare

Reply

4 Kim Greenhouse May 18, 2013 at 8:57 am

Dear Brad,

After doing around 35 climate segments, I’ve learned a great deal. One thing I’ve learned for sure, is that the rat you feel is here regarding sources, is everywhere in the climate scenario.
We’ve done 35 segments on every aspect of climate you can imagine. If you look at it like a wheel with spokes, you may feel quite differently once you have rolled up your sleeves as I have and do your deep and broad scale level due diligence like you would any investigation.

I am saddened to find a clear multi-layered obstruction of science, the brainwashing of the lay public and a broad scale sinister attempt to take over the planet hijacking the sentiment of the most avid environmental activists.

Dogma, not Data, is the new religion of our times. Climate Science has been hijacked. Academic Institutions that don’t toe the line don’t get funding. I am quite clear about my findings and my perspective on what is unfolding. I can tell you that in my experience, it is way worse than anything you will ever hear from the 35 segments. Thank you for posting.

Reply

Leave a Comment