Posted by Tina
Is it the Tea Party people who are out on the fringe or is it the crowd that pushes climate change that’s a little wacky? Tea Party’ers are called extreme and wacky because they advocate for things like lower tax rates, efficiency in government, fewer confusing and costly regulations, a robust economy, and good jobs. You know, the really nutty, fringe stuff! On the other hand the global warming crowd comes up with fantastic assumptions and stories about oceans rising to swamp cities, real Hollywood science fiction fare…and they think themselves brilliant. It’s more than a bit nuts.
The warming crowd doesn’t like disagreement or challenges from the opposition. They don’t like competition either. And when they are challenged they sue!
Recently Democrat Senator Sheldon Whitehouse called for a criminal investigation of various people and organizations that he and his buddies have labeled “global warming deniers.” He has suggested that under the RICO ( Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) laws lawsuits to prosecute oil and coal companies, various scientists and organizations such as the Heartland Institute.
Using tobacco company and pro-life cases as his guide the Senator made the case that “deniers” have:
The parallels between what the tobacco industry did and what the fossil fuel industry is doing now are striking. … The coordinated tactics of the climate denial network, Brulle’s report states, “span a wide range of activities, including political lobbying, contributions to political candidates, and a large number of communication and media efforts that aim at undermining climate science.”
Couldn’t the same case be made against the Warmers? I think so! But discovering what some warming backers have said about “deniers” is where the drive to prosecute becomes outrageous with respect to purpose. Walter Williams did the research and discovered the following quotes:
It turns out that George Mason University meteorologist Jagadish Shukla is the lead signatory of the letter sent to the president and attorney general asking them to use RICO laws to prosecute “corporations and other organizations that have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change.”
Grist Magazine writer David Roberts said: “When we’ve finally gotten serious about global warming, when the impacts are really hitting us and we’re in a full worldwide scramble to minimize the damage, we should have war crimes trials for these bastards — some sort of climate Nuremberg.”
Professor Richard Parncutt has called for the execution of prominent “GW deniers.” Climate Progress editor Joe Romm called for deniers to be strangled in their beds. James Hansen, who has headed NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, has likewise called for trials of global warming deniers.
Turns out Professor Williams’ collegue at George Mason has himself been pegged a “climate profiteer.” He and his wife paid themselves $1.5 million from government climate grants for part-time work.
Now I ask you, who are the real fringe propagandists that are spreading crazy theories, scaring kids to death, and deceptively verbalizing in the extreme for profit?
Question of the day…should they be prosecuted?
I’ll leave you with a smile and a joke by Jay Leno: “According to a new U.N. report, the global warming outlook is much worse than originally predicted. Which is pretty bad when they originally predicted it would destroy the planet.”
They’re loosing their audience and getting desperate to keep the donations and grant money coming in.
Watch Ted Cruz grill the president of the Sierra Club who refuses to answer questions and has to lean back to get his response from his aid.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/10/06/ted-cruz-repeatedly-grills-sierra-club-president-with-one-simple-question-watch-the-answer-he-gets/
Thanks Peggy, I hadn’t seen the exchange between Cruz and the Sierra Club president.
Hmmm…he’d be one of those (b-tards) that should be sued…or brought up on war crimes charges.
These guys are just plain nuts.
As with all demagogues, the more they are proven wrong the louder they rant!
Yes and the more radical is their reaction…I mean, “war crimes?” Who do they think they are?
Nobody’s trying to scare you to death, just get you to face facts (unless such a thing does, actually, terrify you … in which case, well … facts are facts, and you’ll have to face them eventually, terrified or not).
I myself find the whole thing more guilt-making than terrifying. We’ve made the bulk of the mess, but it’s the folk in the southern hemisphere who are going to starve and die in large numbers.
Up here … just don’t buy property in predicted flood zones, thinking it will make an inheritance for your great-grandchildren, because it won’t. And said great-grandchildren must be taught to eat local, because they probably won’t have much choice in the matter.
Libby I don;t need to be “sacred” since it’s all a big hoax. I was making a point about kids. In terms of deceiving children (scaring them to support GW) this lawsuit business could be directed at organizations and people in the GW community in the same way that the tobacco industry was targeted for deceiving kids. The guardian reported on this a few years back:
Given revelations of deception in the GW community, 18 years without warming, science that indicates cyclic changes occur naturally, and the greedy GW quest for funding and political power, I’d say you’ve been sucked-in your own self.
You can go ahead and buy local though, it’s good for you.
Perfect!!
https://scontent.fsnc1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xtl1/v/t1.0-9/11402987_518404788306967_2148122956599712871_n.jpg?oh=e6dc725e25da16735be601854de7215f&oe=56D3126B
There you go!
“… 18 years without warming, …”
What on earth is this bizarro statement supposed to be? … “Chicken Little” in reverse?
Just from Wiki: “In the 15-year period 1995–2010 alone, acidity has increased 6 percent in the upper 100 meters of the Pacific Ocean from Hawaii to Alaska.”
That’s warming, Tina.
And the really fun fact is that we owe a lot of this measuring to U.S. oil producers, who’ve been taking measurements with equipment on tankers for 40 years, but not reporting said data for the last 20, when they realized what a political reaction to the data was going to do to their business model. There are your greedy pigs.
A MATHEMATICAL discovery by Perth-based electrical engineer Dr David Evans may change everything about the climate debate, on the eve of the UN climate change conference in Paris next month.
A former climate modeller for the Government’s Australian Greenhouse Office, with six degrees in applied mathematics, Dr Evans has unpacked the architecture of the basic climate model which underpins all climate science.
He has found that, while the underlying physics of the model is correct, it had been applied incorrectly.
Link to complete article—
http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/opinion/miranda-devine-perth-electrical-engineers-discovery-will-change-climate-change-debate/news-story/d1fe0f22a737e8d67e75a5014d0519c6
—————————-
Follow the money. It’s very difficult to collect taxes from the sun.
As a number of scientists have said, we know very little about this subject and certainly not enough to warrant punishing tax structures and rising energy costs.
Once this money tree is felled, and it seems we’re getting close, I wonder where these radicals will land next? Possibly genetic engineering…building a better/gender neutral human in the name of peace or some other idiotic quest.
“As a number of scientists have said,”
What number would that be, exactly? Can you express that number as a percentage?
CNS News:
A belief system is no way to scientifically determine cause. Even if your stats, acidity has increased 6 percent in the upper 100 meters of the Pacific Ocean from Hawaii to Alaska, are accurate it doesn’t mean that human’s are responsible for the increase.
There has been quite a bit of volcanic activity in the past few years. Solar activity is also cited as having an impact.
The consensus opinion is built on faulty models and a belief system. It’s promulgated for political reasons (control) and greed.
One good thing about your site is that I am lead into the most fascinating little corners of the internet:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/John_Christy_blog.htm
These doughty souls have spent five years patiently exposing all of Mr. Christy’s … misrepresentations … borne of his own adherence to a personal belief system that will not be challenged by any such pesky thing as a fact.
Here are the craziest of those warmers!
15 Military Leaders Who Say Climate Change Is A National Security Threat
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/05/30/15-military-leaders-who-say-climate-change-is-a/184705
Pentagon to rank global warming as destabilising force
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/jan/31/pentagon-ranks-global-warming-destabilising-force
Citi report: slowing global warming would save tens of trillions of dollars
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2015/aug/31/citi-report-slowing-global-warming-would-save-tens-of-trillions-of-dollars
Richard Muller, Koch brothers-funded scientist, declares global warming is real
Now the scientist, who received part of his funding from a foundation funded by David and Charles Koch, prominent billionaire backers of the Tea Party, is recommending what many climate scientists have done before: decreasing greenhouse gases.
Time to get rid of that pesky PenTagon!
The Koch Brothers have sent at least $79,048,951 to groups denying climate change science since 1997.
The debate is over. There is warming and we need to tell the fossil fuel industry propaganda we are not buying their crap.
Dewey how much money have the proponents of global warming spent to perpetuate the lie? How much money have activists MADE for themselves perpetuating the lie?
I guarantee you that since the 1970’s at least that number has grown and become quite obscene…a figure impossible to calculate die to redistribution of government funds (taxpayer dollars) and thousands of foundations that DO NOT pay taxes.
Many men and women of great fortune have backed the global warming movement so your objection to the Koch money is just plain silly.
Global warming is a giant fraud and a hoax and we’ve known it for some time.
Zero hedge:
See also here and, as RHT447 posted, here.
Well, look at all the warmers who dropped by to toss brickbats at skeptics. I think I’ll toss in my two cents worth.
Global warming true believers are a laity of close-minded fanatics who treat Anthropogenic Global Warming as it were a religion. (Which in many ways, it is just that.) Their tightly held beliefs are completely faith based, they have no understanding of the science and scientific issues at hand, and turn a blind eye the enormous discrepancies, errors, and outright frauds that have been committed in the name of AGW “science.” They are completely intolerant of any heterodoxy, even that coming from the scientific community.
Skeptics, on the other hand, are skeptics. They have examined the science and scientific issues at hand, and the enormous discrepancies, errors, and outright frauds that have been committed in the name of AGW “science” and cast a critical eye.
Excellent point Pie! One might say that “skepticism” is the mothers milk of science…without it there would be no inquiry or valid discovery.
It’s GOOD to be a warming skeptic!