For the climate cult, scary charts like Michael Mann’s dodgy “hockey stick” haven’t done the trick of scaring everyone into bug-eating submission. So they come up with stylistic depictions like these to overcome their “communications problem” (which is the all-purpose excuse for our resistance to bug eating—that there might be defects in their case is simply never admitted):
Oh, I’m sure you’re convinced now! How can you ignore the compelling logic of flow-charts like these?
Of course, two can play at this game. Much of the climate con relies on the “consensus” of “peer-reviewed” science. Steve Stewart-Williams calls our attention to a paper he co-authored along with a couple dozen others and published by PNAS on scientific censorship. And the paper offers this chart that accurately reflects what goes on in climate science:
Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.