Monday, November 4, 2024

The Climate Change election

No, it's not because Harris is mad as a hatter on the Green New Deal or because Trump will kill all of this off - although both are entirely correct.  No, this is thinking about the polling which shows the race to be neck and neck even though it is anything but.

Long time readers know how I bang on and on about the hideous data problems in today's Climate Science.  I've been doing this for fifteen years - this post may not be the earliest where I delved into the problems in the climate databases, but it's one of the earliest.  How To Create A Consensus On Global Warming:

We keep hearing people tell us that there is a "consensus" that the planet is warming, because the "science is settled". Longtime readers know my feelings on the latter, so there's no need to rehash old arguments. Instead, I'd like to look at how one might go about manufacturing a consensus. It's actually not hard.

Step 1: Change the data

[lots of details on data manipulation and shenanigans removed]

We see this in high fidelity in the polls for this election.  There are a million ways to manipulate the polls to give you the results you want, such as estimates of Republican vs. Democrat turnout.  In essence, I'm not objecting so much to the results of the polls, but rather to the assumptions that go into the sausage-making machine.  Change the assumptions, change the output.

But my old post also highlights a key issue in play on today's polls:

Step 2. Fund only scientific research that confirms warming.

Who is paying for these polls, and what are their agendas?  Quite frankly, we don't know either of these but the polls are acting in very close agreement.  You could look at that as a measure of accuracy, or you could look at that as an outcome of the agendas - such as shaping public opinion and expectations.

Now I may just be nasty and suspicious but there is a way that we can test whether my suspicions hold water.  It's the same thing we can do with Climate Science, to validate what we hear from the establishment scientists.  All we have to do is ask a simple question: if the data are so settled, do we see lots of corroborating evidence or do we see a lot of evidence contradicting the establishment view?

In both cases, we see a lot of evidence contradicting the official narrative.

For example, for Global Warming, we see all sots of non-warming things:

You would think that if the science really were so settled that evidence for Global Warming would be falling off the trees.  It's not.

And so with evidence for a "neck and neck election".  If it were so settled - after all, essentially all polls say exactly that - then why all the evidence that says it's not?

  • Donald Trump campaigns for Arab-American vote in Detroit
  • LA Times, Washington Post, Gannet refuse to endorse Harris
  • All the betting sites have Trump not just ahead, but way ahead.
  • Even the crooked polls have Harris neck-and-neck, where both Hillary and Biden were up by 5 or 6
  • She is the incumbent but only 28% of Americans think the country is on the right track
  • Barack Obama is trying to shame Black men to vote for Harris.  And it's not working.

If it were a neck and neck race, you'd see a bunch of these on Harris' side, too.  You don't.

Remember, we're in the middle of a preference cascade.  Don't pay any attention to the polls which are trying to gaslight you.  Pay attention to what you see with your own eyes.  And as to the "margin of cheat" you can believe that a bunch of Democrat operatives are doing exactly that right now, and wondering if they want to risk 10 years in Club Fed to try to push a loser across the finish line.  A bunch of them will take a hard pass on that.

10 comments:

  1. Betting odds are even now. Lots of suspicion they were being manipulated by "whales" in both the run up of the Trump numbers and subsequent decline.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Update: Trump seems to have pulled away again.

      Delete
  2. The evil of a corrupt media causes more problems than too many people realize. If enough ever realize the subterfuge, some media personnel may find their pontificating, condescending attitude wrote a check their butts can't pay.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This race doesn't NEED to be "neck and neck". It only needs to APPEAR that way so that the media whores can make the blatant cheating and fraud resulting in Trump losing seem plausible.

    ReplyDelete
  4. OTOH, I only know of two engineers(online only, not IRL) who are supporting Trump. I lurk under another Nom-De-Net on several engineering/aerospace sites, and no one supports Trump. They may not be thrilled about Harris, but the loathing for Trump is quite real.

    I haven't decided who I'm going to vote for later today; the only reason I'm even considering voting for Trump is Elon Musk's endorsement.

    I wish that there was a "none of the above" choice...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Been that way quite awhile. Science is about progress, so they are progressive (and know BS when they see it. Just my opinion - retired scientist.

      Delete
  5. All the betting sites have Trump not just ahead, but way ahead.

    For years I've been saying not to pay attention to polls until the last few days because they want to use that to sell their service based on "we got it right in the last election." Now I think that's too idealist. They sell their polls no matter what because the mainstream media morons (pardon the redundancy) want "the latest poll says" headlines, regardless of who was right last time. The media wants the election to look like the closest election ever to keep people tuning in to see the latest story.

    That's an argument to go with what the betting sites are saying because that's people betting real money and may be the only places left in the world where the economic incentives may push toward the truth.

    Confidential to Plague Monk: If retired engineers count, then you know another one who voted Trump. Assuming you're not already counting me. I personally can't see how any intelligent and data-driven person could go with Harris.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You and Herschel Smith were the two. I'm still torn on the subject and won't make a decision until I actually vote.

      Delete
    2. Large numbers of programmers and engineers still vote blue.

      I've surmised that they:
      1) Still trust MSM
      2) Haven't explored history/politics in detail
      3) It's worked for them so far in their life and they have been sheltered by 6 figure jobs and haven't felt pain in while.

      See the large numbers of posters on Ycombinator News as an example.

      https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42057647

      Delete
  6. Myself here in WA I only voted for the 4 initiatives (yes on all) not one mark for any creature running for "office" as has been mentioned elsewhere many times power attracts the most corruptible and with absolute power it is even worse. Also see George Carlin's comments on If You Vote You Can't Complain. I am fortunate to see him perform in the 90s.

    ReplyDelete

Remember your manners when you post. Anonymous comments are not allowed because of the plague of spam comments.