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. dumboldguy Says:

    Singer? One of the biggest shills of all, and that has been known and talked about for years going all the way back to shilling for tobacco. This link is apparently not recent enough to show Russell as part of the paid Heartland “brain trust”, but he will be on the next list. At that time he will of course deny that he does what Idso and Singer et al do to earn their money—-spread FUD about AGW.

    • “… shilling for tobacco …” Two words: Prove it. Might not want to rely on a particular Desmog piece for your proof, though, I’ll only skewer it with proof they never read their own ‘smoking gun’ evidence. Typical Desmog, all show and no go.

  2. Gene Horner Says:


    It’s easy to criticize someone you disagree with… if you don’t have to provide data to back up your criticism… as you have done. What makes Singer more of a “hack” than Michael Mann, Al Gore, Phil Smith, or James Hansen the creators and user’s of the debunked “Hockey Stick” graph, and the leader of the “Climate-gate” scandal?

  3. dumboldguy Says:

    No, Gene. What’s “easy” is being a troll like you and Russell and spreading crap around. There is no “argument” and there is no “disagreement” about the basic facts of AGW, much as you deniers would like everyone to believe otherwise.

    I will say it yet again, I AM NOT going to provide “data” to “refute” your horsepucky because it has been refuted so many times before. To “argue” something that it just plain WRONG would serve to give it legitimacy. Just as treating you and Russell et all as anything but the whores you are gives YOU legitimacy. You and Singer and Russell and Idso and all the other shills are lying POS’s who distort and misrepresent FACT because you are paid to do so—-whores—-and that’s what I will continue to point out every time you show up parroting the same old stuff. That’s not “criticism”, that’s simple truth, and if you don’t like hearing it here, it, go play on Russell’s or Goddard’s site or WUWT with the likes of Dave Burton (I saw your little tag team on a thread—you two are a fine match).

    I will respond briefly to only two of your lies with “data”:
    1) The only thing scandalaous about so-called “climategate” was the behavior of the deniers that tried to make something of nothing. It’s a long dead issue.
    2) The hockey stick has never been debunked. It becomes more real every day as AGW advances and is being joined by more hockey sticks (like arctic sea ice).
    These two assertions require no more proof than “The sun rises every day”.

    • fletch92131 Says:

      I’ll contest your comment that Mann’s hockey stick has never been debunked. If you carefully read this article, you’ll see that Mann went out of his way to hide the true facts of his research, like placing some data in a separate subdirectory with the striking name “BACKTO_1400-CENSORED”,

  4. Gene Horner Says:

    You truly are a “dumboldguy!”

    The IPCC removed the hockey stick graph from it’s reports a decade ago, and Phil Jones resigned from the Hadley CRU in disgrace after Climate-gate broke.

    Then there’s the 31,487 scientists (Oregon Petition project) that say you and the other climate religion true believers are completely wrong.

    Consensus? Are you telling this audience that 77 of 3,100 scientist are a 97% consensus? here’s where that false statement came from… time for you to learn something factual!

    Here’s the “survey” that gave the AGW zealots their supposed 98% consensus! 

    It was a 2009 AGU questionnaire posed by 2 University of Illinois students. It is about as un-scientific a “study” as is possible. They simply sent (through the web site) their 2 questions to 10,257 scientists from all over the world, getting a 30% response, then selecting 0.77% (less than 1%, for those mathematically challenged) and deciding that 0.73% of the original number surveyed somehow made a 98% consensus!

    I quote:

    “In our survey, the most specialized and knowledgable respondents (with regard to climate change) are those who listed climate science as their area of expertise and who also published more than 50% of their recent peer-reviewed papers on the subject of climate change (79 individuals in total). Of these specialists, 96.2% (76 of 79) answered “risen” to question 1 and 97.4% (75 of 77) answered “yes” to question 2.”

    And what were the only 2 questions posed in this survey you ask?

    1. “When compared with pre-1800 levels, do you think global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant?”

    2. “Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?”

    Unbelievable!… even more-so that almost 50% of Americans took the “consensus” statement (of 75 scientists)… and believed it!

    Yet they are clueless that  31,487 U.S. scientists signed the Oregon Petition Project (see below)… including Dr Edward Teller!

    Click to access 012009_Doran_final.pdf

    Then there is the later Cook et al study that claims 31% of respondents somehow equal 98% consensus!

    All you seem to be able to do is blindly accept the pablum politicians want you to believe.

    Congratulations dumboldguy, you are a true Lemming!

  5. dumboldguy Says:

    Yep, I truly am a “dumboldguy”, and a “true Lemming”. Those are rather feeble insults, but are apparently all that a low-IQ flaming anal orifice like you can come up with. And to paraphrase what was said to Dan Quayle way back when: “I was insulted by professional insulters during my career, and you’re no professional—-you are a rank amateur” (And you’re also an embarrassment to more literate deniers. Why don’t you go away and leave Crock to Russell? At least his command of the language is better than yours, even though his IQ isn’t much higher).

    You prove yet again just what a flaming anal orifice you are by talking to us about the Oregon Petition project, one of the most laughable pieces of propaganda that deniers have ever put forth. You and all the other shills should tear that page out of your “Handbook of Talking Points for Low IQ Denier Trolls” and stop embarrassing yourselves with it.

    The rest of your BS here is about that ancient and meaningless “(76 of 79)-(75 of 77)-(77 of 3,100)-(etc) survey”. We destroyed your anal orifice buddy Dave Burton when he brought that up a long time ago on Crock, and won’t waste time doing the same with you. Suffice to say that it’s one of the straws that you deniers grasp at because you are reduced to grasping at straws. Go away!

  6. Gene Horner Says:

    dumboldguy… Since you have no scientific background, no common sense, and no ability to carry on a reasonable debate… you are obviously left with only petty little attempts at insults. Too bad, I was hoping you might have been someone who had a clue… obviously I was incorrect. Your pitiful attempts at demeaning those of us who actually have some knowledge, leaves you out of any further discussion. You are typical of the far left zealots who shout down, rather than debate… or (heaven forbid) listen to other points of view.

    You aren’t worth the time I’ve already wasted on you

    Goodby Lemming

  7. dumboldguy Says:

    You “actually have some knowledge”, Gene? WOW, you sure fooled me, because your comments here show no evidence of “knowledge” beyond being able to look up meaningless crap in your Troll Handbook and mindlessly parrot it back to us.

    In addition to a couple of degrees(+) in science (meaning I went to college and studied physics, chemistry, biology—-and later taught same), I have gathered enough “common sense” over a long life to be able to recognize people like you for what they are. I have also managed to learn more than a bit about what it means to engage in a “reasonable debate”. You have given evidence here that YOU are the one with no science, no logic, and no honesty.,and I am glad that I was able to help you do so.

    Enjoy your little strut around the barnyard crowing like the demented rooster who thinks he is oh-so-smart and superior. We here on Crock find demented roosters amusing. Then go away. Go find Dave Burton and play with him.

  8. dumboldguy Says:

    Go away. Crawl back under the bridge with Gene Horner.

  9. dumboldguy Says:

    More attempts at deflection, sloppily built straw men, and outrageous non sequiturs like red wine from the flaming anal orifice named Russell. The funniest line in this collection of BS is the one suggesting the NIPCC has credibility because it publishes opinions based on peer-reviewed studies.

  10. dumboldguy Says:

    LMAO! McIntyre and McKittrick? How about citing Monckton and Watts? If you’re going to trot out years-old crap from the denier circus, bring out all the clowns and let’s have a real parade?

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: