exEPH jak se na vec koukaj lidi, ktery investujou do fosilu. prklo (btw ani v tom 15. stoleti si lidi nemysleli, ze je placata, spor byl o to jestli je nebo neni stredem slunecni soustavy / vesmiru)

Myslíte, že k oteplování klimatu nedochází?
To určitě netvrdím, ale jsem přesvědčený o tom, že kdybychom se bavili o emisích skleníkových plynů obecně, tak je vliv CO2 vzniklého v důsledku lidské činnosti na skutečné oteplování klimatu velmi malý, a nebyl objektivně popsán.
Když se na situaci podíváte dlouhodobější optikou, a ne optikou klimatického alarmismu posledních 20 let nebo 30 let, tak není vyloučeno, že jestliže dochází k oteplování planety jako k objektivnímu jevu, tak je primárně způsobeno něčím jiným než lidskou činností.
…
Každopádně ale mohu říci, že strategie Evropské unie na snižování emisí CO2 je z mého pohledu zcela iracionální a reálně ekonomiku EU zásadně poškozuje.
Dnes jsme se bohužel dostali spíše do úrovně náboženství. A nedej Bůh, že je někdo ochoten nahlas vyslovit jiný názor, než odpovídá všeobecně přijímanému narativu. Mně tady chybí skutečná vědecká diskuse nad objektivními fakty, nezkreslená zájmy vlivových skupin na všech stranách. A také schopnost formulovat přijatelné a dlouhodobě fungující řešení, bez nějakých líbivých zkratek, bez toho, že bychom současně ignorovali následky nevratných kroků, které činíme.
…
V 15. století byla shoda na tom, že je Země placatá. Osobně bych uvítal skutečně vědeckou diskusi, nedeformovanou zájmy vlivových skupin, ale to nevím, zda je ještě reálné, už se z toho celosvětově stal obrovský byznys.
Je ale myslím zřejmé, že na cestě, kterou jsme jako Evropa zvolili, zůstáváme zcela osamoceni. A přitom cena, kterou platíme a budou platit generace našich dětí, je nesmyslně vysoká a z hlediska skutečného přínosu obtížně obhajitelná. Ty prostředky by se daly využít globálně nepoměrně efektivněji a s dramaticky větším účinkem a mohly mít přesně opačný efekt pro evropskou ekonomiku.

https://www.seznamzpravy.cz/clanek/ekonomika-byznys-trendy-analyzy-kretinskeho-exmanazer-evropa-jde-cestou-na-ktere-zustala-uplne-sama-268746#dop_ab_variant=0&dop_source_zone_name=zpravy.sznhp.box&source=hp&seq_no=1&utm_campaign=abtest277_vis_box_impress_varDD&utm_medium=z-boxiku&utm_source=www.seznam.cz

The Playbook
How to Deny Science, Sell Lies, and Make a Killing in the Corporate World


Summary
'This brilliantly subversive and witty book lays bare the techniques of manipulation and disinformation that keep the rich and powerful rich and powerful. . . A landmark book' Brian Eno

'Very funny, as satire should be, until you realise it's deadly serious' Adam Rutherford, BBC Radio 4 Start the Week

Knowledge is power. Which is why the rich and powerful don't want you to have it.

The Playbook is an exposé of the extraordinary lengths that corporations will go to in order to spread disinformation and deny the scientific facts - around climate change, public health risks and worker safety - when they don't suit their agenda.

Written in the form of a corporate handbook for tobacco, oil and pharmaceutical company executives, it is a litany of obfuscation techniques, denial, delays and outright lies, including: how to recruit an academic 'expert' who is willing to compromise their integrity (or is just short of cash), how to massage the statistics, how to use legal and even physical intimidation against reporters and activists, and how, just as in a casino, to keep your customers comfortable, unquestioning, unthinking and playing along for as long as possible.

Part satire, part social history, part guide to resistance, The Playbook is a charge sheet against the powerful. It shows us how, by understanding the methods and motives of disinformation campaigns, we may be able to outwit them.

Jennifer Jacquet
https://www.penguin.co.uk/authors/72630/jennifer-jacquet

Climate Denial in American Politics is a detailed examination of the rise within American politics of climate denialism, the counter movement which challenges the accepted science of climate change.

Organized around the administrations of American presidents from Roosevelt to Biden, this book provides an unprecedented account of climate denial within both the White House and Congress, and the ‘climate brawls’ that followed. This volume is a rebuke to discredit the climate denier, their propaganda, and their sources. Gerald Kutney examines the evolution of American political thought on climate change and provides a comprehensive survey and analysis of the sordid history of the propaganda which has promoted climate denial and corrupted politicians in America. He uses direct quotes from primary sources, such as government records, to show the extreme and pervasive nature of anti-science opinions made by political climate deniers and limit any misinterpretation that might result from paraphrasing. Weaving the account of climate denialism in American politics with anecdotes from Kutney’s own decade-long experience of challenging climate deniers on Twitter using #ClimateBrawl, this book provides a valuable insight into the world of climate obstruction.

Climate Denial in American Politics will be of great interest to students and scholars of climate change, environmental politics and American politics more broadly.

https://www.routledge.com/Climate-Denial-in-American-Politics-ClimateBrawl/Kutney/p/book/9781032592794

Generative AI chatbots fail to adequately reflect fossil fuel companies’ complicity in the climate crisis, a Global Witness investigation has found

AI chatbots’ greenwash and bothsidesism about Big Oil | Global Witness
https://www.globalwitness.org/en/campaigns/digital-threats/greenwashing-and-bothsidesism-ai-chatbot-answers-about-fossil-fuels-role-climate-change/

V EU konzervativni strany rozjizdej koordinovanej utok proti environmentalnim NGOs. Ocividne inspirovany USA a tim, ze vylhany obvinovani funguje…

Faustine Bas-Defossez on LinkedIn: Under attack: Reaction to misinformation regarding NGO funding
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/faustine-bas-defossez-92085713_under-attack-reaction-to-misinformation-activity-7288458961446395904-991L

In this video I provide context on a podcast that Tucker Carlson recently did with climate change denier Dr Willie Soon. It is mainly about the abiogenic petroleum theory, that is, the question whether the crust of planet Earth contains hydrocarbons that do not come from fossils, but I also have some comments on what Willie Soon said about the honesty of climate scientists.

Fossil Fuels Don’t Come From Fossils? Tucker Carlson Fact Check
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNsGzDmSjD0&ab_channel=SabineHossenfelder

Big oil spent $445m in last election cycle to influence Trump and Congress, report says
Investments ‘likely to pay dividends’, analysis says, as Trump unleashes dozens of pro-fossil fuel executive actions

Big oil spent $445m in last election cycle to influence Trump and Congress, report says | Oil and gas companies | The Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/23/big-oil-445m-trump-congress

Sabine Hossenfelder si precetla program AfD a checkla, co rikaj o klimatu:

Sabine Hossenfelder
@skdh
I had a look at the party program of the AfD, that's the party that Musk supported. They're old-fashioned climate change deniers of the most idiotic kind. They still claim (in 2025!!) that the "The question for the human contribution [to climate change] is not settled."

We left the "science not settled" phase 25 years ago!

Fact is, that we know the contribution of various sources to climate change well, and that of humans is dominant, though of course the exact values have error bars.

They go on to claim that "the alleged consensus for "human-made climate change" has previously been politically fabricated"

And claim support from a declaration that has been signed by 2000 supposed experts. This statement has been debunked hundreds of times, is full of falsehoods, most of the people who have signed it have nothing to do with climate science, many have ties to the fossil fuel industry and in any case, just because some people have signed a nonsense statement doesn't make it true.

(Oh yeah, and one of the signatories is John Clauser who claims he has fixed climate change with his self-made cloud model but can't tell a stratocumulus from a cirrus cloud.)

This isn't a matter of debate, you can check for yourself that the predictions from climate models from the 1970s were in fact remarkably accurate. Even the fossil fuel industry, which developed their own climate models (probably hoping to get a different result), confirmed the climate model predictions.

This has been so widely documented that to go around in 2025 and write -- in a party program no less! -- that climate models don't work or carbon dioxide isn't the issue, demonstrates that these people are either deliberately lying or don't have the faintest clue what they are talking about and also don't care. (Probably the latter.)

It is one thing to have opinions about what, if anything, we should do about climate change. Mitigate or adapt? How much, how fast, how urgent? How much risk are you willing to accept, how much of a burden are you willing to put on future generations? These are all value positions that are up to discussion and can go into a party program.

Scientific evidence is not a matter of opinion. This is a party which bases its so-called strategy on fabricated facts.

It is hugely distressing to me that not only do brainless people like this sit in the German parliament but that a whopping 20% of Germans support this drivel. And that ladies and gentlemen is what your hero Elon Musk stands behind.

(There's more rubbish in their program but for me this was the worst part.)

The Grand Russian Disinformation Strategy in Environmental Politics

The Grand Russian Disinformation Strategy in Environmental Politics | Department of International Relations
https://ir.ceu.edu/ohpa/research_blog/articles/rusdisinformation

TUHO: Organizační báze českého klimaskeptického hnutí
Vedoucí práce: doc. Mgr. Petr Ocelík, Ph.D.
Katedra mezinárodních vztahů a evropských studií obor Mezinárodní vztahy a energetická bezpečnost

Ehm related. Novy vyzkum Nature: na sitich jsou casteji banovani konzervativci. Proc? Casteji sdili dezinformace.

Abstract
In response to intense pressure, technology companies have enacted policies to combat misinformation1,2,3,4. The enforcement of these policies has, however, led to technology companies being regularly accused of political bias5,6,7. We argue that differential sharing of misinformation by people identifying with different political groups8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15 could lead to political asymmetries in enforcement, even by unbiased policies. We first analysed 9,000 politically active Twitter users during the US 2020 presidential election. Although users estimated to be pro-Trump/conservative were indeed substantially more likely to be suspended than those estimated to be pro-Biden/liberal, users who were pro-Trump/conservative also shared far more links to various sets of low-quality news sites—even when news quality was determined by politically balanced groups of laypeople, or groups of only Republican laypeople—and had higher estimated likelihoods of being bots. We find similar associations between stated or inferred conservatism and low-quality news sharing (on the basis of both expert and politically balanced layperson ratings) in 7 other datasets of sharing from Twitter, Facebook and survey experiments, spanning 2016 to 2023 and including data from 16 different countries. Thus, even under politically neutral anti-misinformation policies, political asymmetries in enforcement should be expected. Political imbalance in enforcement need not imply bias on the part of social media companies implementing anti-misinformation policies.

Differences in misinformation sharing can lead to politically asymmetric sanctions | Nature
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07942-8

Novy Heatwave je venku

V Evropě desítky let převažovalo přesvědčení, že ve vztahu k Rusku podpora vzájemného obchodu povede ke sbližování a vzájemně prospěšné spolupráci. Geopolitické zájmy ustoupily obchodní kalkulaci. Evropa se otevřela závislosti na ruských fosilních palivech a zároveň ignorovala všechny jeho imperiální výpady. Nakonec tím financovala vyzbrojení svého největšího nepřítele. Jak je možné, že Evropa tak dlouho ignorovala varovné signály stále agresivnější a imperiálně laděné Ruské federace? Jakou roli v tom hraje fosilní byznys a korupce v politice? A jak fosilní paliva ovlivňují geopolitiku a přispívají k autoritářské vládě a násilí? A jak z toho dnes ven?

https://denikalarm.cz/2025/01/jak-evropa-nepochopila-rusko-rozhovor-s-veli-pekkou-tynkkynenem/