Lying about climate change to advance the environmental agenda is a good idea, sayÂ two economists in a peer-reviewed paper published in the American Journal of Agricultural Economics.
Don’t have to ‘believe.’ Here is the actual PEER-REVIEWED paper …
AbstractIt appears that news media and some pro-environmental organizations have the tendency to accentuate or even exaggerate the damage caused by climate change. This article provides a rationale for this tendency by using a modified International Environmental Agreement (IEA) model with asymmetric information. We find that the information manipulation has an instrumental value, as it ex post induces more countries to participate in an IEA, which will eventually enhance global welfare. From the ex anteperspective, however, the impact that manipulating information has on the level of participation in an IEA and on welfare is ambiguous.
At this point it’s absurd to keep asking the scientific community to churn out more reports. In fact, it might almost be more useful if they went on strike: until you pay attention to what we’ve already told you, we won’t be telling you more …
Down tools, warmist workers of the world!
Because it’s perfectly clear by now that you can’t scare politicians with the news thatÂ the world is ending.
As for the strike, go for it. Let’s make it global. Australian taxpayers will be grateful for the savings.
UPDATE. The strikers will have toÂ stop lying.
Want to be a “climate scientist”? Well you can be within a week. Simply write a paper on the weather or whatever, have it peer-reviewed, then publish it in some dodgy Green journal and voila! Â You’re a “scientist!” Now you can start reporting your conclusions to the UN’s IPCC about how we are all about to die of sun stroke while drowning in high tides at the same time. They are looking forward to hearing from you