James Delingpole – Con-Artist and Fake News Journalist Extraordinaire

47
870


Right wing extremist and fake news peddler, James Delingpole, is one of the alt right’s rising stars. From criticizing the science of climate change, to making racist remarks about Barrack Obama, to appearing on conspiracy-driven talk shows like the Alex Jones Show, he has proven himself, like most alt-righters, to be a complete and utter lunatic. But that hasn’t stopped a growing number of fellow lunatics from peddling his fictional writing as real journalism. He now writes for Breitbart, the most discredited news site on the web, where he gets to legally spread his fake news to millions of people, causing untold damage to the political process and undermining faith in important institutions and world leaders.

James Delingpole claims to have been educated at Oxford, but hasn’t provided any documentation to prove this. Other than that, all he has to his name is a string of jobs at laughably discredited “news” organisations such as the Daily Mail and the Daily Express, who dedicate about as much coverage to celebrities and sports as they do to fake news. He was fired from the Telegraph due to his extreme right wing views, which were embarrassing the newspaper, and he has since been desperately offering his sophistic writing services to any organization mad enough to hire him. 

Delingpole claims that there are many problems with the science of Climate Change, even though every serious scientist, politician and activist agrees that the problem is real, urgent and threatens our very existence. Delingpole’s disinformation about climate change played a significant role in convincing Trump and his supporters to reject the Paris climate agreement, which has literally put the lives of millions and the very existence of our planet at risk. Is James facing jail time for his false claims? No. Instead he’s working at Breitbart where gets to spread more fake news.

Delingpole has laid numerous criticisms at Barrack Obama, which many consider to be racist. In his book, “Obamaland, I have seen your future, and it doesn’t work”, James attacks Obama for his past as an influential community organizer and accuses him of being a communist, without ever explaining in any kind of coherent way what is wrong with Obama’s desire to provide Americans with affordable healthcare, put undocumented immigrants on a path to citizenship and improve education for struggling minorities. His vicious attack on America’s first African American president reeks of racism, and hiding his bigotry behind his conservative mantra only makes him a coward. The title of his climate science-denying book, “Watermelons”, is also an obvious dog whistle to his racist followers that he thinks lowly of African Americans, who are cliched to enjoy watermelons.

It’s sad that in this day and age, fake journalists and fraudsters like James Delingpole are still allowed to publish their lies and hate speech to the entire world, without any legal repercussions. Fortunately, most people are smart and informed enough to reject his ramblings without giving them as much as a second thought. Let’s hope it stays this way, because the last thing this world needs is more disinformation from charlatans like James Delingpole.

richandrenee

99.9% of scientists agree that anthropogenic climate change is real and the only way to save the planet is world government with extraordinary powers! What would some alt-right freak hack like Delingpole know?

trav777

It’s actually more like 98% and the climatic models have become very accurate when applied in a predictive model against historical data.

Scientists do not actually agree about world government and extraordinary powers. But they do almost unanimously agree that anthropogenic emissions are a significant contributor to climate change (not the only one) both upward and downward. Feel free to whistle past the graveyard but take a look at reef bleaching due to the fairly trivially-understood effects of CO2 content in the oceans. I mean if you’re stupid enough to believe that this actually is part of some sinister conspiratorial plot or something. Unfortunately, it isn’t.

Doubting Rich
Doubting Rich

“It’s actually more like 98%”

No, that is a lie. None of the studies showing this stand up to scrutiny, mostly because they test an hypothesis that covers most sceptics as well as alarmists. They find that 97% of scientists agree that the Earth has warmed and that human activity has a significant effect. Well so do I. I believe James Delingpole does, although you’d have to ask him. Certainly other prominent sceptics like Judith Curry, Garth Paltridge, Roy Spencer, Freeman Dyson, Roger Pielke Snr and Jnr (all of whom are scientists in the climate field, putting the lie to the claim in the article that “…even though every serious scientist, politician and activist agrees that the problem is real…” even if it was not obvious that many politicians disagree and activists define themselves by whether they agree or not, so that claim being nonsense.

“the climatic models have become very accurate when applied in a predictive model against historical data.”

Sort of. They were tuned to follow historical data. They still don’t follow it well very far back, though. However are you aware of th mathematical principle that as the number of variables increases, by choosing those variables you can fit any curve increasingly well? It is a way mathematicians estimate integrals that are impossible to solve, by fitting an nth-order polynomial to the curve. As n gets higher the precision increases. Take any n points and you can always fit a polynomial of order n-1 that goes through all those points.

It is said to be von Neumann who said “With four parameters I can fit an elephant, and with five I can make him wiggle his trunk”.

Climate has many unknown variables. These are used to tune the models to fit historic data. The only test then is how they fit data from after the models were run. 97% of them are outside the 95% confidence interval, with the model running hot. So they don’t work.

“But they do almost unanimously agree that anthropogenic emissions are a significant contributor to climate change (not the only one) both upward and downward”

But they do not agree that the contribution is higher than 50% (the IPCC claim) let alone that it is at least 90% of late-20th-century warming, which would indicate a possible problem. Most sceptics agree to this. The problem is that alarmists see “significant” and assume “dangerous” or even “catastrophic”. Then money pours in (of the order $10bn a year from the US government alone) to climate research. I wonder why the researchers keep exaggerating the effects (which we know they do)?

trav777

It really doesn’t matter, dude.

This data isn’t particularly pertinent anymore. There are any number of climate models available now and a zillion other sources of heat content and temperature. The science on this is pretty much settled unless you are an idiot, which is the problem- most people simply cannot understand any real science nor are able to discern truth from fiction. It did not help that many of the politicians behind the movement had personal agendas inconsistent with merely reporting the data faithfully.

You can wiki the scientists who disagree with AGW and there’s even a gif on the page showing the present models’ alignment with the historical record, none of which relies on any hockey sticks

Doubting Rich
Doubting Rich

“There are any number of climate models available now …”

All of which use the same core, which uses incorrect maths and physics. The maths I was taught was wrong at A-level further maths (that is late high-school, for those not British). It uses a process of multi-variable calculus on dependent variables, which you cannot do. While it does come up with sensible-seeming answers the answers are likely to be wrong, might be meaningless. The bad physics is a bit easier to explain. They assume that every process can be replaced by a “forcing” expressed as a factor in of heat reaching the ground. So even processes high in the atmosphere are treated as a change in radiation on the ground, to simplify the model. This is obviously ridiculous.

They also all use finite element analysis (i.e. cut the world into blocks by space and time and treat each block as an “element” with certain properties which influence it’s own and the surrounding blocks in the next element of time) which is the only way to make this kind of many-parameter model. However the blocks are huge – far larger than some meteorological phenomena that are important – like thunder storms.

Finally they have all been shown by at least three lines of empirical evidence (surface/lower troposphere temperature, upper troposphere temperature in low latitudes and response of outgoing radiation to temperature) to be wrong, and wrong in exactly the way sceptics say they are wrong: they exaggerate positive feedback.

Doubting Rich
Doubting Rich

Just for completeness (because it’s over 20 years since I studied this), here is an explanation of the problem with using multi-variable calculus on dependent variables. Dr David Evans, writer of the article, is a mathematician who specialises in modelling.

http://joannenova.com.au/2015/09/new-science-4-error-1-partial-derivatives/

trav777

and yet the reefs still bleach and ocean heat content still rises while pH declines…go figure. It’s almost as if simple chemistry is at work.

feel free to continue to whistle past the graveyard when models are accurately matching historical data.

You expose QUIBBLES with the fucking data, pal, not the underlying trend.

Doubting Rich
Doubting Rich

“…a zillion other sources of heat content and temperature”

Did you see the recent study by researchers from MIT among other sources that described the three temperature data sets used to calculate a global average (leaving aside whether such a datum has any meaning, which I would dispute) as “…not a valid representation of reality”.

We have no idea if today’s temperatures are especially high on a 100-year scale, let alone a more meaningful 8-10,000 year scale!

https://thsresearch.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/ef-gast-data-research-report-062717.pdf

Doubting Rich
Doubting Rich

I love the way the moderator just uses red background to claim this is “post-truth” (WTF does that mean?) because he cannot come up with any argument or evidence against it.

#hate-speech

Pbier

‘I love the way’ was a nice start but then you followed it up with a sarcastic comment. This is a progressive site as well as a safe space and we don’t tolerate irony or sarcasm which is capable of hurting feelings.

Otherwise, thank you for your comments.

Doubting Rich
Doubting Rich

Hahaha – flagged as hate speech? What hate speech? Please quote what in that is hateful.

Pbier

It’s not any one word or even collection of words, rather the hurtful tone that was used. A number of our more sensitive readers felt quite upset.

redson
redson

Er, no they don’t. That claim was debunked years ago as any fool knows. IT is amazing that morons still try to spout this drivel, as if 97pc consensus on something as unknown as climate science is even remotely likely. The stupidity of the climate cultists really knows no bounds, as they simply ignore the cold, hard facts of history that debunks their pitiful dogma. And the claimed figure was 97pc not 99.9pc, dimwit.

Vladmir Putin
Vladmir Putin

Al Gore is growing increasingly pink. If he encounters a few more global warming deniers, he’ll get boiling hot and explode pink all over.

Normie Pneumatic
Normie Pneumatic

MDB, thanks you for exposing this right wing creature. I had no idea how dangerous he was to mankind. Now that I know, I can at least avoid any of his writings so that I don’t become triggered by his hateful hurt speech and alternate facts.

Pbier

This is such an important article. Delingpole is an unashamed populist who sucks on the bloated teats of public dissatisfaction. A few years ago, he was more moderate in his views; now, he likes nothing more than to stir up the masses through his angry writings, pointing his gnarled finger at his enemies, seeing them as less than human.

Warning: the last person to do this wrote a book called Mein Kampf. You have been warned!

Black Lives Matter

I’d like to slam my FIST into his crooked white teeth. BASH THE FASH!!!11!!

hungrypirana
hungrypirana

You mis-spelled Barrack. The correct spelling is Milhous.

Black Lives Matter

Xe’s using the preferred Muslim Arabic spelling in honor of Obama’s Muslim faith and Kenyan birthplace.

hungrypirana
hungrypirana

Kenya, indeed.

Doubting Rich
Doubting Rich

“Delingpole has laid numerous criticisms at Barrack Obama, which many consider to be racist.”

Yet in all this article, when you imply so many times that Mr Delingpole is racist, you cannot come up with a single instance of racism. Criticising possibly the most radical left-wing president in US history is not racist. Indeed that you assume the only thing important about Obama is the colour of his skin, and appear to think that he is so delicate that he should be protected from event he most valid criticism by cries of “raaaacist!” is pretty damned racist from where I sit.

You know that the title of the book “Watermelons” does not refer to race. In fact the idea is so stupid that I was half convinced this was a satirical piece taking the **** out of leftie journalists when I got to that part, until I saw the comments. You are, I know, aware that the title refers to environmentalists, most of whom are wealthy, white trust-fund kids or white politicians or celebrities. The title refers to the fact that most are green on the outside, red in the middle – using environmental concern to hide their support for the vile ideology of communism.

redson
redson

Brilliant, debunks the Mail and the Express, both newspapers of note, as ‘fake news’ but cannot spell the christian name of the, clearly, god-like former president…

Black Lives Matter

Is it just me or is that white really ugly? All whites look alike to me, so it’s hard for me to tell, but he looks like an almiqui with buck teeth:

http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.37175.1344984631!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/gallery_1200/almiqui.jpg

Prune
Prune

This is certainly hate speech. Recognition of that fact would be appreciated.

Willis_Eschenbach
Willis_Eschenbach

Dear heavens, you guys are hilarious! Thousands of real issues out there, and you are OBSESSED with some random guy writing things you don’t like on one of a thousand websites …

Get a freakin’ life ASAP, this is lunacy.

w.

wpDiscuz