...
The video is about a woman who published a climate study that followed the general consus and was idolised. Then people pointed out flaws. She looked at them, realised some of what she had written was incorrect, and published the adjustments needed. For this she was vilified. The video is certainly mostly about propaganda, but is not propaganda.
Have you ever looked at any of the IPCC reports? Not the media's write ups about them, but the actual reports? When I have looked at exerts they sound much less scary than the media reports, but the activists don't like anything but the most extreme arguments.
Yes I have looked at it many times, I have a copy of the full report open right now. Before posting my earlier reply I searched through all 3056 pages of it for any evidence of a prediction that hurricane and storm frequency would increase monotonically year on year. I found none.
I agree entirely that we should be discussing the contents of that IPCC report as representative of the scientific consensus rather than media reports. So with that in mind I ask again, where in that IPCC report is there any claim that is not supported by scientific research?
I looked at the video carefully. Starting 2:00 minutes into the video the commentary says
"But then some researchers pointed out gaps in her research. Years with low level of hurricanes... She realised her critics were right." The only evidence given to support this was a briefly shown document from Stephen McIntyre pointing out that hurricane and storm frequency was exceptionally low in 2006. Let's assume that McIntyre's research is correct. If Curry had previously claimed that hurricane and storm frequency would increase monotonically year on year, then she was right to reevaluate her own research. Are you suggesting that she was vilified for changing her mind on a specific claim that was never a part of the consensus in the first place?
What was it that motivated her to abandon that consensus? At what time mark in the video does she cite any credible scientific evidence to justify her dramatic change of position?