pete_moulin1500Peter Sinclair is a videographer specializing in issues of Climate Change and renewable energy solutions.
Mr. Sinclair produces the video series “This is Not Cool”, for Yale Climate Connections. He has produced more than a hundred videos in the series “Climate Denial Crock of the Week”, a sharply satirical and scientifically rigorous response to the many bits of climate science misinformation, and disinformation, often seen on the internet – which Mr. Sinclair calls the “Climate Crocks – something Rush Limbaugh can say in 10 seconds that takes an honest scientist an hour to unpack”.

Since 2013, Mr. Sinclair has been Media Director of The Dark Snow Project, an ongoing science communication effort that focuses on clarifying and communicating the emerging story of melting ice in Greenland and its impact on global weather and sea level rise. Mr. Sinclair has traveled three times to the Greenland ice sheet with scientific teams to document ongoing research in this area, and interviewed hundreds of today’s best known glaciologists, oceanographers, geologists, and atmospheric scientists.

A frequent speaker, Mr. Sinclair has brought his rich multi-media presention to schools, colleges, universities and community groups throughout Michigan and around the world – including the University of Michigan, Michigan State University, the University of Reykjavik, and invited presentations for scientists at American Geophysical Union gatherings in San Francisco and Colorado. He has been called “The sharpest climate denial debunker on YouTube” and “The most important videographer on the planet.” A life long Michigan resident, Mr. Sinclair resides in Midland with his wife Sandra Collinson, an educator. He has two children.


59 Responses to “About”

  1. Peter have you heard of new genre fiction term for movies and novels about climate a la sci fi but caLLED cli fi I COINED IT, SEE cli fi central BLOG OR clifibooks.COM by mary woodbury a webzine about cli fi books. do you liek the term cli fi,,,as a wake up call word>? yes no>?

  2. spreading, thanks to you…. HuffPo UK is next. Maybe AP and Reuters next. and final view is NYTimes if we can get Pam Belluck there to report it. Tune stayed

  3. And Andy Revkin at Dot Earth, and he of course, knows your work well.

  4. I believe Danny Blooms’ comment above about “cli fi” pretty much sums up what warmists have been up to, and what they will ultimately end up having to heavily rely on before their theory ends up falling apart under its own weight in, oh… about 10 years (judging by the failed 1970s analogue). History will be merciless on its supporters when it does. So I’d recommend everyone start distancing themselves from it as soon as possible – just as a bit of friendly advice.

    Barring that, at least stop vilifying everyone who takes advantage of freedom of speech and voices their doubts and thoughts. Science is not the be all and end all of everything in the universe. Anyone who thinks that has never been married 🙂 We have every right to call you out as you think you do in denigrating our opinions. Doesn’t a free person have every right to complain about their medical doctor and seek a second opinion even if that doctor and many of his peers believe they’re right and the patient is wrong?

    Your theory – if it is the correct one (and I already covered my belief that it is not above) – will not triumph as a result of trying to silence critics of it or ridiculing competing theories or critics of your theory. It will only do so, as it always does, by preponderance of evidence, as happened in the debate between mobilists an fixists over continental drift.

    Until then, Long live freedom, the internet and opposing viewpoints!

  5. mjhooper2013 Says:

    “…vilifying…..” Now that is the specialty of the deniers.
    In ten years, they will be begging the realists to “fix” the problems that are coming at us full force.
    People who don’t get it, don’t understand that when the permafrost melts we will have an earthwide methane increase that will equal that of the Permian era when, what? 90%? of all species were killed off.
    Right there, methane, is the fly in your ointment, deniers. Ad yes, the permafrost is, indeed melting. Has been for some time.
    So wake up…..but never mind, you’d wake up just in time to die from the methane, along with the rest of us. Evolution has had some failures, and one has to do with the human brain resisting unpleasant truths…..

    • Gene Horner Says:

      Amazing how theory has become reality in your mind hooper! I guess you have found the new religion you’ve been looking for? The unpleasant truth for you, is every computer theory you’ve hung your hat on… has failed to materialize! Latest examples are Gore’s admonition that the arctic would be ice free by 2013, and that the antarctic ice is melting and sea levels are rising!

      There is so much real science out there, if you would just take the time to look at both sides of what should be a debate! Everyone should be a skeptic of AGW and Climate Change, as the proponents are all politicians.

      Remember the Himalayan Glacier scandal at the IPCC?


    • If only commenter “mjhooper2013” could point to verbatim text in which any skeptic climate scientist or skeptic speaker outright denied the existence of global warming over the last century or so. Lord Monckton took on that specific exercise in July, I was at the back of the room to see the array of hands rising: For expediency’s sake, I’ll start his video of that point here and viewers can see the entire presentation as they wish.

  6. […] Peter Sinclair of ClimateCrocks recently produced two YouTube interviews with NCAR’s Kevin Trenberth about the upcoming 2014/15 El Niño.   See Part 1 here.  At about the 9-minute mark in Part 2 (here), Trenberth speculates, sounding gleeful, that the upcoming El Niño may lead to another in the series of upward steps in global surface temperature: […]

  7. […] Peter Sinclair of ClimateCrocks recently produced two YouTube interviews with NCAR’s Kevin Trenberth about the upcoming 2014/15 El Niño. See Part 1 here. At about the 9-minute mark in Part 2 (here), Trenberth speculates, sounding gleeful, that the upcoming El Niño may lead to another in the series of upward steps in global surface temperature: […]

  8. I’m a trained graphic artist myself, the design of my GelbspanFiles banner is entirely my own, but I am not an award winner and your site is clearly presented more crisply. It was my intention after my last job in 2008 that I would take time off to finish various housekeeping tasks I’d put off for way too many years, and then I’d use my savings to start an eclectic graphic arts company focusing mostly on casting patternwork and hobby related decal/photoetch artwork. But one day I (made the mistake, some would say) dropped a flip remark at a hobbyist web site’s off-topic forum on global warming, where one fellow said we were all going to die of global warming if we didn’t stop it.

    All I dropped in a quote I’d seen at Dr S Fred Singer’s site, and then asked what happened to the global cooling fad. That went over well. Than later I was assured by no less than an SEJ board member that lots of people proved Dr Singer was a paid industry shill, but the guy couldn’t bring himself to share who all those folks were beyond the one guy I’d found myself. And the rest is history.

    Trust me on this, when I am able to hand off what I’ve found on the way the accusation implodes to journalists who comprehend the enormity of the wipeout, I’ll get back to where I was so rudely interrupted on the start-up of my li’l graphics business.

    • greenman3610 Says:

      “70’s ice age crock”

      • Nice presentation, you are to be commended on your presentation skills. But of course with such presentations, credibility problems arise when lapses of judgement are exposed when viewers comprehend the existence of false premises or missing material. On the latter, you only bless us with the late Dr Schneider’s backpedaling on his participation in a paper, and not his significantly more egregious participation in the Leonard Nimoy “In Search of…” program in which Dr Schneider did nothing to suggest there was not outright runaway global cooling:

        Oh, dear, the ‘pop-culture science’ problem. But do we hear condemnation from you about Al Gore’s movie, Oreskes’ upcoming movie or widespread promoting of global warming as settled science in the mainstream media?

        On the former problem with false premises, you offer us one on the ‘golden standard’ of peer-reviewed papers in science journals… an arena which not only blessed us with Mann’s hockey stick graph but also news of how a widely cited “Researcher Who Studied Benefits Of Red Wine Falsified Data” and was found guilty of 145 counts of fabrication and falsification of data” Ironic how AGWers push this as a standard that must be met, but then flee when people like me point to all the peer-reviewed, science journal-published papers cited in the NIPCC, veering straight into another deception about the whole of the NIPCC being a fabrication. But of course I also know that mere peer review science journal publication is meaningless, as witnessed in the above anti-oxidants studies.

        Luv the reference to legendary William “wikipropaganda” Connolley when it comes to supposedly debunking global cooling and his paper co-authors who had their own credibility problems ( ). Could it be their paper’s conclusion resulted from the same sort of cherry-picking Oreskes’ stands accused of? But once again, what I was speaking of was the fad of global cooling in comparison to the same fad of global warming.

        That said, I still appreciate the opportunity to comment at ClimateCrocks. I imagine you’ll receive ever heavier pressure to ban me and delete everything I’ve said. Anyone for T̶e̶n̶n̶y̶s̶o̶n̶? tyranny? (li’l PBS jab, there “anoldguy” would never get it, though)

  9. Gene Horner Says:

    You want verbiage from scientists that deny global warming over the last 100 years or so? Ok, how about from 31,000 plus scientists? would that change your position from that of a Lemming to one where you become aware that the skeptic position is worth looking into… without bias?

    Try googling “The Oregon Petition Project”, and read the petition that Dr Edward Teller and some 31,457 other scientists signed and sent to Congress.

    In part:

    “There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.” “Moreover there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon plant and animal environments of the Earth”

    Can’t wait for the responses from those of you that blindly accept the government and IPCC mantra that computer models with a 97% failure rate (admitted by the IPCC) are somehow correct, and 77 out of 10,257 scientists polled is also a 97% consensus!

    G Horner

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: