Author Archives: Russell Cook

About Russell Cook

Russell Cook is a semi-retired graphic artist. His collection of articles and blogs about the Gelbspan/Gore/Ozone Action/Greenpeace accusation can be seen here: http://gelbspanfiles.com/?page_id=86

Spreading the ‘Crooked Skeptic Climate Scientists’ Accusation within the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

Posted on by

I detailed how Ross Gelbspan is found directly in IPCC climate scientist Dr Michael Mann’s emails in my August 7, 2013 post. In two of my other posts here, I showed how IPCC Vice Chair Jean-Pascal van Ypersele had prominently accused a particular skeptic scientist of industry corruption, and how Ypersele cited Naomi Oreskes for his insinuation that the ClimateGate email leaks were the result of an effort “‘organized’ to undermine efforts to tackle global warming.” I can additionally add that the then-Chairman of the IPCC also suggested in regard to the ClimateGate email scandal, “it was entirely possible that ‘corporate interests’ had had a hand in the leak.” (full text here).

Now, let’s briefly examine one more time where the ‘crooked skeptics’ accusation was passed around. Continue reading →

Teach the Collegians Well

Posted on by

A follow-up on my March 10, 2017 GelbspanFiles post, where I explored how college students get swept up — seemingly without question — into regurgitating global warming political tangents; specifically, the notion of ‘Big Coal & Oil’ paying skeptic climate scientists to lie. I suggest that college students don’t simply cough up this stuff out of the blue, they’re taught do so by their professors. But first, I have something of an error to admit to ….. which, unfortunately, does nothing to help either the student or professor I wrote about. Continue reading →

Wow. Comment stalkers. And robot defenders of man-caused global warming?

Posted on by

As noted in my prior post’s opening sentence, I have comment stalkers who land at online article/blog comment sections hurling personal attacks at me in response to whatever basic comment I’ve made on the global warming issue. One in particular follows me around to specifically respond by placing a link to Desmogblog’s worthless profile of me. Now, allow me to first demonstrate it in the following funny way Continue reading →

2nd Hand Smoke kills (or so we’re told), pt 1

Posted on by

What does that have to do with climate science? Absolutely nothing, and by God, any idiot knows breathing second-hand cigarette smoke can’t be good for you. So if anyone or any organization even remotely denies that it is at least harmful in some way, then those people are folks you want to avoid mentioning at all costs, so as not look like a fool yourself. This includes situations where those same folks dare to question the settled science of catastrophic man-caused global warming. It’s all a brilliant setup ….. but there is one eensy-beensy fatal problem here. Continue reading →

Writing Congressional Hearing Rebuttal vs Being Investigated at a Congressional Hearing

Posted on by

It’s one thing for book author / documentary movie star Naomi Oreskes to be tapped for quotations on the state of affairs in the global warming issue — last night’s appearance on the PBS NewsHour (2:49 point here), for example. It’s quite another problematic situation when she is tapped for work by Democrat politicians. Continue reading →

What’s the Deal with that Other Book?

Posted on by

I dissect myriad angles of the accusation about skeptic climate scientists ‘being paid by Big Coal & Oil to lie to the public’ for basically for one reason: to amass bulletproof information for journalists who want to objectively tell the story of how character assassination has been used as a tactic to steer the public away from taking those skeptics’ science assessments seriously, and/or for attorneys or congressional investigators who might want to hold people accountable who may have engaged in either libel/slander against skeptic climate scientists, or who may have engaged in some form of racketeering to prevent their global warming gravy train from derailing. Regarding the following problem, envision a TV courtroom drama scene, where the prosecuting attorney raises some action the defendant made, the defense attorney objects, and the prosecutor replies with, “goes to motive!” Continue reading →

“These windmills go really slowly, they don’t eat up a lot of birds”

Posted on by

In my previous post, I detailed at length how an apparently hapless college student’s “Misinformation Campaigns Spread by the Fossil Fuel Industry” research paper fell apart under hard scrutiny. Today, let’s spend a shorter time on the elemental idea of ‘misinformation’ in the global warming issue, and where it seems to be more readily found. Continue reading →