CO2 Coalition Claims Victory Over Censorship; Facebook Removes “False” Label from Climate Models Article

Facebook Rating Had Blocked Sharing of Climate Science Op-ed

Arlington, VA – The CO2 Coalition is claiming victory today as Facebook removed a “False” rating from an opinion piece written by two members of the coalition of 50 climate scientists and energy economists.

The article, which was published by the Washington Examiner on August 25th, was titled “The Great Failure of the Climate Models,” and written by Dr. Patrick Michaels, a climatologist, and Dr. Caleb Stewart Rossiter, a climate statistician. The article had been labeled “False” by Facebook and as a result was blocked from being forwarded or seen by Facebook users.

The Facebook label of “False” is based on a review of the Michaels-Rossiter article by the climate alarmist group Climate Feedback. The group is a project of Science Feedback, one of Facebook’s “fact-checking partners” to help it determine whether content is valid on its platform. Science Feedback and Climate Feedback are funded by climate alarmist Eric Michelman.

“The review is replete with errors and simple differences of opinion. Its purpose is not to inform and debate, but simply discredit,” wrote CO2 Coalition Board Chairman Dr. Patrick Moore and Executive Director Dr. Caleb Rossiter in a letter to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg. “The scientific process of testing hypotheses deserves better than that.”

“These actions by Facebook constitute censorship of science and defamation of our scholarship,” they continued. “They appear to us to contradict Facebook’s stated role as a non-partisan site for the exchange of opinion and information, and the advancement of knowledge and understanding. Why has Facebook given Climate Feedback, a proponent of the alarmist narrative that itself is unsupported by the data and analysis of UN and US government agencies, the authority to censor its intellectual opponents?”

A copy of the letter, which was sent to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, is below.

September 10, 2019

Mr. Mark Zuckerberg
Chief Executive Officer, Facebook
1 Hacker Way
Menlo Park, CA  94025

Dear Mr. Zuckerberg:

We are writing to protest Facebook’s censorship of an opinion article written by two members of our coalition of 50 climate scientists and energy economists. This article in the Washington Examiner was titled “The Great Failure of the Climate Models,” It appeared on August 25, 2019. The authors were Dr. Patrick Michaels, a climatologist, and Dr. Caleb Stewart Rossiter, a climate statistician. The article was labeled “False” by Facebook and as a result has been blocked from being forwarded or seen by Facebook users. It can be found at: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/the-great-failure-of-the-climate-models

These actions by Facebook constitute censorship of science and defamation of our scholarship. They appear to us to contradict Facebook’s stated role as a non-partisan site for the exchange of opinion and information, and the advancement of knowledge and understanding.

The Facebook label of “False” is based on a review of the Michaels-Rossiter article by the hyper-partisan climate alarmist activist group Climate Feedback, a project of Science Feedback. Science Feedback and Climate Feedback are funded by climate alarmist Eric Michelman. The review is replete with errors and simple differences of opinion. Its purpose is not to inform and debate, but simply discredit. The scientific process of testing hypotheses deserves better than that. The review can be found at: https://climatefeedback.org/evaluation/washington-examiner-op-ed-cherry-picks-data-to-mislead-readers-about-climate-models-patrick-michaels-caleb-stewart-rossiter/

Why has Facebook given Climate Feedback, a proponent of the alarmist narrative that itself is unsupported by the data and analysis of UN and US government agencies, the authority to censor its intellectual opponents?

Support for our claim about the alarmist narrative and how it contradicts the data and analysis of these agencies can be found in Dr. Rossiter’s testimony and submissions to congressional hearings this year: https://docs.house.gov/meetings/GO/GO28/20190430/109352/HHRG-116-GO28-Wstate-RossiterC-20190430-U1.pdf and http://co2coalition.org/2019/07/25/u-s-government-climate-science-vs-u-s-government-climate-crisis/.

Facebook subscribes to the principles of the International Fact-Checking Network. Yet its reliance on Climate Feedback patently violates the core principles of the network: non-partisanship and consultation. Neither the authors nor the publisher were notified by Facebook or given a chance to dispute the Climate Feedback review prior to the labeling and censoring.

Climate models are complex attempts to mimic an even more complex system, the climate of planet earth. They are important and controversial because their predictions form the basis of often-made but yet-to-be realized alarmist claims that industrial emissions of carbon dioxide will create a climate catastrophe, and so must be stopped, despite the dire consequences for billions of people.

In the interests of the public’s right to learn from an open debate on this important topic we ask that you remove Facebook’s censorship, labeling, and restrictions on this article. Other scholars, such as atmospheric physicist Judith Curry, have also been subject to Facebook censorship in recent days. We ask that Facebook not censor any voices in the climate debate, including those of Climate Feedback and other alarmist authors. With deference to Voltaire, we disagree strongly with many of their opinions but we defend to the death their right to express them.

The General Secretary of the World Meteorological Organization, one of the UNIPCC’s two convening bodies, recently said of people who exaggerate its reports: “It’s not going to be the end of the world. The world will just become more challenging…They are doomsters and extremists…The IPCC reports have been read in a similar way to the Bible: you try to find certain pieces…to justify your extreme views. This resembles religious extremism…We should consider critically, and with reservations, the thoughts of experts.” We urge you to follow his plea, and not censor scientific opinion.

Attached you will find the memorandum we wrote to the Washington Examiner on the Facebook claim and the Climate Feedback conclusions and analysis, as well a letter referenced in that memorandum to the Governor of Texas, in which earlier this year three of our members disputed claims by a member of the Climate Feedback review team.

Sincerely,

Dr. Patrick Moore, Chairman of the Board

Dr. Caleb Stewart Rossiter, Executive Director