The Biden administration worked hard to block any factual information about climate and energy, by labeling it as “misinformation.”
June 10, 2022
“When it comes to responsibility for the spread of climate misinformation, the White House has its eyes on Big Tech.
During an Axios event on Thursday, Gina McCarthy, the White House’s climate adviser, said tech companies need to crack down on the spread of false and misleading information about the climate crisis. While flat-out climate denial has waned, McCarthy said misinformation on major social media platforms persists in a different but “equally dangerous” form.
“The dark money is still there,” she said. “The fossil fuel companies are still basically trying their best to make sure that people don’t understand the challenge of climate.”
Specifically, she said a small but vocal group of users are repeatedly using tech and social media platforms to sow doubt about the feasibility of the energy transition. The transition to zero-carbon technologies isn’t just doable; it’s necessary. And most importantly, it’s happening. Yet McCarthy said the entrenched fossil fuel interests are “seeding, basically, doubt about the costs” of the clean energy.
“We need the tech companies to really jump in,” she added.
Major tech companies — including, mostly recently, Twitter and Pinterest — have tried to tackle some forms of misinformation. In the case of Twitter, the company said it would block advertisements that “contradict the scientific consensus on climate change.”
However, the stripe of misinformation that McCarthy is most worried about continues to be insidious and widespread. A recent Media Matters study on the spread of climate and energy misinformation on Facebook found that a large portion of posts use “energy independence” as a justification for drilling for more fossil fuels, amid a lot of hand-wringing about our dependence on foreign energy. These kinds of posts are replete with inaccuracies and lies, but are rarely labeled as misinformation nor are they fact-checked.
Another report out this week from a coalition of advocacy groups shows misinformation tends to tick up around major events, such as last year’s climate conference in Glasgow. Similar to McCarthy, the report’s authors called for more concerted action by tech companies to ensure lie-laden posts don’t spread, including potentially working together to prevent falsehoods from moving across platforms. Giving researchers and regulators more access to data could also help, as could coming up with common definitions of misinformation. It’s clear from McCarthy’s comments that the Biden administration is acutely aware of what’s happening on social media, and it’s watching what tech companies are — and aren’t — doing to help stop the spread of misinformation.”
A Tribute to Independent Science and the Power of Curiosity
Forrest M. Mims III is a name that should be familiar to anyone who values empirical science, skepticism of institutional gatekeeping, and the power of independent research. He’s also a regular commenter here on WUWT, having become a fan of what we do.
His latest book, The Maverick Scientist, (available on Amazon) is both an autobiographical account and a testament to the value of observational science—something increasingly overlooked in today’s world of model-driven speculation and institutional orthodoxy.
Mims is best known for his work in electronics and atmospheric science, despite lacking formal academic credentials. His contributions to Scientific American, particularly his Amateur Scientist columns (back when the magazine was actually about science), and his pioneering role in developing scientific instruments make him a fascinating figure in the history of independent research. But perhaps most notably, he was infamously denied a position at Scientific American due to his religious beliefs—a stark example of the biases that pervade supposedly “objective” scientific institutions. This book delves into that episode and many others, making a strong case for why science should be open to all, not just those with the right credentials or ideological conformity.
A Life of Scientific Inquiry
Mims recounts his lifelong passion for experimentation, from early childhood tinkering to groundbreaking research in atmospheric science. His journey includes designing altimeters for model rockets, inventing devices that have been used by NASA, and—perhaps most relevant to today’s discussions on climate—his work measuring atmospheric aerosols and ozone using simple yet effective optical instruments.
His research, particularly on atmospheric turbidity and the effects of volcanic eruptions on solar radiation, underscores an important lesson: much of climate science depends on direct, real-world observations, not just theoretical models. Mims demonstrates that critical atmospheric data can be gathered with relatively inexpensive tools, a point that undermines the mainstream insistence that only large-scale, government-funded research projects are legitimate.
In my opinion, the best part of the book is the section on atmospheric optics and his design of the LED Photometer
One of the most fascinating sections of The Maverick Scientist is Mims’ groundbreaking work with LED photometers, which he used to measure atmospheric aerosols, water vapor, and ozone. Unlike conventional scientific instruments costing tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars, Mims developed a highly effective and affordable alternative using simple light-emitting diodes (LEDs).
The core principle behind his LED photometer is remarkably simple yet ingenious. LEDs, when used in reverse, can act as narrow-band light detectors. Each LED is sensitive to a specific range of wavelengths, making it possible to measure atmospheric components like aerosols and ozone by analyzing how much sunlight is absorbed or scattered at different wavelengths. By calibrating these devices and comparing them to more expensive commercial instruments, Mims demonstrated that his low-cost method was highly accurate, but even more important, easy enough for almost anyone to build and use.
His experiments, conducted over decades, yielded valuable insights into atmospheric transparency, solar dimming, and aerosol concentrations. One of his most notable findings involved tracking the effects of volcanic eruptions—such as those of Mount Pinatubo in 1991—on atmospheric clarity. He documented how aerosols injected into the stratosphere caused significant reductions in solar radiation reaching the Earth’s surface, a well-known but often underappreciated natural factor affecting climate variability.
Mims’ photometer also allowed him to measure changes in atmospheric water vapor, an often-overlooked but critical factor in climate science. Unlike carbon dioxide, water vapor is the most significant greenhouse gas in Earth’s atmosphere, yet its variability and role in cloud formation remain poorly understood by climate models. Mims’ work provides a valuable empirical dataset that challenges some of the overconfident assumptions in climate modeling, particularly regarding feedback mechanisms.
On 5 February 1990, I began using homemade instruments to make near daily measurements of the ozone layer, total water vapor, and the optical depth of the sky caused by dust, smoke, and air pollution. The latter two measurements were made with the first LED sun photometer, which works as well today as it did 35 years ago.
You can see all of its 35 years of data nearby. Note the two encircled regions showing the effects of the historic eruption of Mount Pinatubo in 1991 and the even more historic underwater eruption of Hunga Tonga in 2022.
Notice the slight downward trend in the graph. He writes in the abstract of his paper (bold mine):
Reduced air pollution caused mean AOD (Atmospheric Optical Depth) to decline from 0.175 to 0.14. The AOD trend measured for 30 years by a light-emitting diode (LED) sun photometer, the first of its kind, parallels the trend from 20 years of measurements by a modified Microtops II. While TPW (Total Preciptable Water) responded to El Niño–Southern Oscillation conditions, TPW exhibited no trend over the 30 years.
That lack of a trend in TPW blows a hole in the idea that climate change is causing a positive water vapor feedback effect. So much for climate models.
What makes this research so significant is not just the scientific insights, but the broader implication: high-quality atmospheric data can be gathered without the need for multimillion-dollar government grants or institutional approval. This democratization of scientific tools is something the establishment rarely acknowledges because it undermines the monopoly they have over climate data and interpretation.
One of the book’s most compelling themes is the tension between independent scientists and the scientific establishment. Mims doesn’t shy away from discussing how institutional science often dismisses contributions from “outsiders,” even when their data and methods are sound. His own exclusion from Scientific American is a prime example, but the broader implication is clear: scientific consensus is often shaped by social and political pressures rather than pure empirical evidence.
This is a theme I’ve observed time and again in climate science. Researchers who challenge the prevailing narrative—whether on temperature reconstructions, climate sensitivity, or the role of natural variability—are frequently belittled and sidelined, not because their data is flawed, but because their conclusions don’t align with the orthodoxy. Mims’ story reinforces the need for a truly open scientific discourse, where ideas are tested on merit rather than suppressed for ideological reasons.
Mims’ work in atmospheric optics is particularly relevant in an era where climate science is increasingly dominated by models rather than real-world measurements. His efforts in developing sun photometers and tracking atmospheric aerosol content highlight a crucial point: empirical observations remain the foundation of good science.
For instance, Mims’ studies of post-volcanic atmospheric effects provided key insights into how natural events influence climate. This is a vital counterpoint to alarmist claims that all observed climate changes are anthropogenic in origin. If a single volcanic eruption can significantly alter atmospheric conditions for years, what does that say about the climate models that often fail to account for such variability?
The Maverick Scientist is an inspiring read for anyone who believes in the power of independent inquiry. It’s particularly relevant for those of us who question the prevailing narratives in climate science and other politically charged scientific fields. Mims embodies the spirit of open, empirical research—something that has been increasingly sidelined in favor of institutional control and politically convenient conclusions.
His book is also a reminder that science is not the exclusive domain of PhDs working at government-funded institutions. Some of the most important discoveries have come from those outside the establishment—Galileo, Tesla, and now, in the modern era, independent researchers like Mims. His story is a call to action for amateur scientists, skeptics, and anyone willing to challenge dogma with data.
Final Thoughts
Mims’ The Maverick Scientist is a refreshing and necessary book at a time when scientific debate is too often stifled by institutional gatekeepers. It highlights the value of observational science, the dangers of ideological conformity, and the enduring power of curiosity-driven research.
The story of his LED photometer alone is worth the read—it’s a prime example of how simple, cost-effective scientific tools can provide critical data that challenges prevailing assumptions in climate science. That kind of empirical work, not speculative modeling, is what science should be built upon.
For those who believe that science should be a field of open inquiry rather than a rigid orthodoxy, this book is a must-read. It’s a tribute to independent thought, a critique of scientific elitism, and a guidebook for anyone who wants to pursue real science—regardless of credentials.
Anthony’s Rating: 5 out of 5
Bonus review: his other book on his work at the Mauna Loa Observatory
For readers interested in atmospheric science, The Maverick Scientist pairs well with another of Mims’ books, Mauna Loa Observatory: Hawaii’s Global Laboratory. This work documents his time researching at the famed atmospheric monitoring station on Hawaii’s Mauna Loa volcano, where key climate and atmospheric measurements—including the famous Keeling Curve tracking CO₂ concentrations—are recorded.
In Mauna Loa Observatory, Mims details how he used his LED photometers to monitor aerosol optical thickness, a crucial measure of atmospheric clarity that affects solar radiation reaching the surface. His findings at Mauna Loa reinforced his earlier discoveries about volcanic aerosols, confirming their significant influence on global temperature fluctuations. Importantly, his work also raised questions about inconsistencies in mainstream climate data collection, particularly regarding long-term atmospheric trends. By showing that affordable, independently built instruments could match or even outperform expensive government-funded systems, Mims once again highlighted the value of empirical science over institutionalized gatekeeping.
His experiences at Mauna Loa further illustrate one of the key themes in The Maverick Scientist: independent researchers can and do make important contributions to science, often in ways that challenge the prevailing consensus. His atmospheric observations serve as a reminder that natural variability, such as volcanic activity and solar radiation fluctuations, plays a major role in climate—something that many model-based climate projections tend to underestimate.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Outsourcing your malicious behavior is no longer
a get-out-of-consequences-free card
This should be especially bad news for any of the dark-money groups that have quietly been ramping up violence against politically expedient targets — say, Tesla, for example.
What could a North Dakota jury judgment handed down against Greenpeace over a pipeline have to do with dark money politics-for-hire across the country? Quite a lot, actually.
At issue were the pipeline protests in North Dakota like the one where environmental activists cared so DAMNED much about the land that it took a state of emergency and the Army Corps of Engineers to avert an environmental catastrophe:
“Warm temperatures have accelerated snowmelt in the area of the Oceti Sakowin protest camp … Due to these conditions, the governor’s emergency order addresses safety concerns to human life as anyone in the floodplain is at risk for possible injury or death,” said the statement.
However, “the order also addresses the need to protect the Missouri River from the waste that will flow into the Cannonball River and Lake Oahe if the camp is not cleared and the cleanup expedited,” the statement read.
…Just how much waste and trash did the environmentally conscious DAPL protesters leave? “Local and federal officials estimate there’s enough trash and debris in the camp to fill about 2,500 pickup trucks,” reported AP.
Not surprisingly, months-long protests are chosen because they can cause both damage and harm, depending on the group, the tactics, and their intent.
The owner and operator of the pipeline, who lost an enormous contract as a result of their actions, took the protesters to court. They suffered serious financial harm and those who caused it should bear the responsibility for making them whole. Modern notions of protest notwithstanding, that’s how the court system was designed.
When they took to court Greenpeace and the Red Warrior Camp
(who the plaintiff claimed was their proxy)
on exactly this principle, the jury agreed.
After two days of deliberation, the New York Times reported, the jury returned the verdict. Energy Transfer, the owner and operator of the pipeline, filed the lawsuit in North Dakota state court against Greenpeace and Red Warrior Camp, which Energy Transfer claimed was a front for Greenpeace, and three individuals.
The lawsuit alleges that Greenpeace had engaged in a misinformation campaign with mass emails falsely claiming that the Dakota Access Pipeline would cross the sovereign land of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. In court filings, Energy Transfer claimed protesters engaged in a campaign of “militant direct action,” including trespassing on the company’s property, vandalizing construction equipment, and assaulting employees and contractors. —JustTheNews
This comes at a very bad time for violent leftwing activists. For years, the establishment left has been somewhere between indifferent to, or even happy to seeviolence on the streets, so long as that violence aligns with causes on the political left.
You never hear the kind of breathless language the establishment left uses when describing, for example ‘the Proud Boys’ when they describe, say, Antifa, BLM, Jayne’s Revenge (violent abortion activists), Palestinian Protesters, trans extremists, or (now) anti-Tesla crowds embracing forms of violence ranging from rioting on the streets, storming a building and threatening a young woman inside it, holding universities hostage, or vandalizing/firebombing Christian pro-life institutions, threatening churches, or most recently attacking anyone or anything with a Tesla connection.
The one thing so many of these movements including the current organized attacks against Tesla — have in common is copious amounts of financial backing. Efforts like what we have seen in DOGE, not to mention an FBI interested in prosecuting such crimes instead of helping them raise bail money — will be a game-changer on the investigation side of this problem.
AG Bondi, and those working with her have made it clear that investigating these fire bombings (and the SWAT-ings) will be treating the use of incendiary devices under statutes listing such actions as a federal crime punishable by up to 20 years in prison.
If the logic of this Greenpeace case is extended to culpability of the Dark Money orgs who have been using third-party agitator groups as arm’s-length shock troops for hire that give them a plausible deniability…
… this North Dakota ruling may set a precedent that says otherwise. One that other groups who have been harmed by political activism over the last number of years might play ‘follow the money’ with in seeking the redress of their harms.
Elon seems to think the breadcrumbs for a lot of the dark money issues will take us back to familiar names like ‘Act Blue’ or ‘Arabella Advisors’. If the early clues at DOGE, and the mayhem unfolding at Act Blue are any indicator, he could be on to something there.
It would take some imaginative thinking to come up with deterrents to a purely mercenary cause-of-the-day agitator group than the twin prongs of drying up the money supply and dropping the perpetrators in a hole where they can be completely forgotten about by society for a decade or two.
And if the feds draw the same inference with criminal culpability
that the jury in North Dakota just did?
Those media establishment types who were publicly giddy about Biden’s use of RICO statutes to take down Trump will soon be choking on their words and looking to bury records of their public statements cheering the Trump team prosecutions.
“Sea ice has declined by more than 12 per cent every decade since 1978, when satellite imagery – the Scanning Multichannel Microwave Radiometer or ‘SMMR’ – started recording Arctic sea ice growth and retreat.” The Arctic could be ice-free by … Continue reading →
