Roy Spencer seems to have had enough:
I’m not talking about those who think we should be working toward new forms of energy to eventually displace our dependence of fossil fuels. Even I believe in that; after all, fossil fuels are a finite resource.
I’m instead talking about the extremists. They are the ones who are sure they are right, and who are bent on forcing their views upon everyone else. Unfortunately, the extremists are usually the only ones you hear from in the media, because they scream the loudest and make the most outrageous claims.
They invoke “consensus”, which results from only like-minded scientists who band together to support a common cause.
This authoritarianism tends to happen with an over-educated elite class…I have read that Nazi Germany had more PhDs per capita than any other country. I’m not against education, but it seems like some of the stupidest people are also the most educated.
So, as long as they continue to call people like me “deniers”, I will call them “global warming Nazis”.
I didn’t start this fight…they did. Yeah, somebody pushed my button.
Mine, too.
I snorted when I saw this retort in the comments:
Peter Gleick says: February 20, 2014 at 4:17 PM
Roy, have you lost your fucking mind?
Peter
Truthseeker says: February 20, 2014 at 4:40 PM
Peter, have you lost your fucking integrity?
Schooling is not necessarily education. Decades of school all too often translate inversely to useful education.
Coming from a so called Christian, that’s pretty funny.
Who is a “so called Christian”? What is the relevance, if any, of this comment?
Roy Boy claims to be, but that seems to be false now. That’s the relevance.
It seems to be false to whom? And why? What is it with these non sequiturs? This has nothing to do with religion, other than the climate religion.
Well you see, during WW-II British, Canadian, and American Christians, including Roosevelt and Churchill, never called the members of the German Socialist Workers Party “Nazis”, because that would be unchristian.
Oh wait. That doesn’t make a lick of sense on any level, does it?
I can’t figure out what the heck he means, either.
In your world climate scientists are terrorizing future generation by depriving them of carbon, lol. Real Nazi’s were quite a bit different. Spencer is unhinged.
And Rand is going to lose some civil litigation. So just keep talking here. Thanks.
Oh. OK. Now your comments make sense.
You’re another anonymous idiot.
Many of these global warming wackos have already talked about the urgent need to drastically reduce the human population back to what is “sustainable”, and are frequently calling for re-education camps for “denialists”, along with the need for forge popular consensus into a cohesive and unified social force that can do the impossible through their iron will, and the need to sidestep dysfunctional democracy. And of course, like the Nazis, they’re absolutely convinced that it’s up to them to save humanity from imaginary boogie man, whether evil Jewish capitalists or sunny days with beach weather.
So yes, they could be ordinary Nazis through and through, all proud progressive socialists, but since they don’t believe in German nationalism, they are somewhat different.
In your world climate scientists are terrorizing future generation by depriving them of carbon
I don’t know what world our guest lives in or imagines others to live in, but the climate scientist I’ve seen tend to want to deprive people of their money by claiming a natural occurring event like breathing is a pollutant to the world, and so the air that people exhaust should be taxed. To make sure everyone is on the same page, these scientists and their fan boy politicians fly in private jets to Davos during the winter to discuss their plans and ski.
That is so weird how search the terms ‘reeducation camps for denialists’ doesn’t return much of anything, just a few right wingnut websites. I’m pretty sure prosecution of litigation in the civil courts will suffice. The heavy hitting can be left to future generations.
What’s even weirder is how anonymous morons keep showing up at my website with non sequiturs.
Your Google foo is weak. Try reading the blather from Kari Norgaard, an environmental and sociology professor from Oregon. She thinks climate skeptics suffer from a mental disorder and suggests methods of treatment at international conferences like this one in London.
Yes, she actually flies all the way across a continent and an ocean, and back, in a giant CO2 spewing jet airplane just to say that people who don’t worry about CO2 (or that in 100 years central Kentucky might be as warm as southern Kentucky) have to be re-educated.
And that’s one of the weird truths about these eco-Nazis. They’re perfectly willing to kill millions to make sure their local climate doesn’t vary by more than 1 C, but dangle a 20 percent raise in front of this wacko and she’d take a job at the University of Miami, increasing her local climate by 12.5 C – without even considering temperature as an issue.
They’re like the Nazis who chose to bleed to death rather than risk being tainted by a trace of Jewish blood from plasma provided by an American medic, but happily allied themselves with little Japanese guys who were definitely non-Aryans.
Guest is right, I don’t know why you guys just don’t concede. There isn’t any pressure or efforts to indoctrinate people by people who’s only motive is to save the environment.
These accusations of unethical behavior and comparisons to the Nazi are totally out of line.
Rand wrote:
“What’s even weirder is how anonymous morons keep showing up at my website with non sequiturs.”
Could it possibly be the same person?
The London International Conference Center certainly qualifies as in ‘internment camp’. Hopefully the bagels and coffee in the morning made the attendees feel more comfortable for the gas chambers in the afternoon, lol. Here’s the deal. Please keep talking. Whatever you do, don’t stop talking. You are your own worst enemies. This is precisely the kind of dissent and skepticism scientists love. Thanks.
Leland: “but the climate scientist I’ve seen tend to want to deprive people of their money by claiming a natural occurring event like breathing is a pollutant to the world, and so the air that people exhaust should be taxed.”
Defecation and Urination is also a naturally occurring event. We also tax
people for Sewer service, so that sewage treatment can occur.
Um, Guest, the people cheering at the Nazi party rallies weren’t the same people who got put in the labor camps. The insiders traveled around in luxury, snapping up artwork and sipping champagne at their luxurious conferences. The people who didn’t get RSVP’d to the conferences didn’t do so well, mostly getting starved, shot, or put to work at starving and shooting people.
Ok, so far I’ve established that the only references to ‘internment camps’ and ‘reeducation camps’ have been from right wing nut websites, and that these so called ‘camps’ of yours are actually scientific conferences. Now, are you claiming that children are not served lunches at their ‘elementary school reeducation camps’? Seriously, please keep posting. you are doing yourself a great service.
Why would anyone think that the same people, like Obama’s science czar John Holdren, that have advocated for mass forced sterilization would be capable of turning our education system into a re-education camp?
http://zombietime.com/john_holdren/
People get these negative impressions because AGW alarmists are always making statements about wanting to fulfill some totalitarian fetish. The scary part isn’t their desire for utter control and rule by dictate but the malicious desire to punish those who disagree with them.
From wikipedia : In 1977, Paul R. Ehrlich, Anne H. Ehrlich, and Holdren co-authored the textbook Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment; they discussed the possible role of a wide variety of means to address overpopulation, from voluntary family planning to enforced population controls, including compulsory abortion, adding sterilants to drinking water or staple foods, forced sterilization for women after they gave birth to a designated number of children, and discussed “the use of milder methods of influencing family size preferences” such as access to birth control and abortion.
You seem to have a disdain for the truth. Discussing is different from advocating. 1977 is a long time ago. Most people have moved on to the acknowledgment that Darwinian economics will moot most of those issues with nuclear war, famine, economic and environmental collapse, plague, etc. Climate change will simply move the timeline forward. The worst thing I think that has been proposed is interning these people in Convention Centers where they will be served coffee and donuts and bombarded with presentations.
That’s your idea of Climate Nazi’s.
Sure it was just a “discussion”. Why is it that ideas like this keep popping up in the AGW alarmist community? The idea that there are too many people on the planet and that something must be done to address it runs rampant.
Why would anyone claim the AGW alarmist community wants to act with malice against people who disagree with them?
How many more shootings at the Discovery channel need to happen before AGW alarmists realize that their movement leans heavily toward violence and totalitarianism rather than science?
Not only is climate science uncertain about how the climate works and how human factors affect the system but it is also uncertain about the outcome. The computer models all been wrong and there is no certainty that climate change will necessarily have negative outcomes. A warming climate could lead to less severe storms and an expansion of the climes suitable for growing large amounts of food. Or it could be a mixed bag with good and bad effects. It is uncertain and the track records of predictions from alarmists shows there should be zero blind faith in their claims.
Instead of admitting that uncertainty and the validity of holding an opinion of being uncertain, the AGW community has resorted to running commercials calling for the death of everyone that disagrees with them. Then there are the totalitarian public policy proposals which are often instituted through dictate and regulations rather than the legislature. And don’t forget the efforts to excommunicate the unbelievers from academic society.
Ya, it is a mystery why anyone would look at the AGW community with any skepticism.
Sure it was just a “discussion”.
Which you conveniently spun into ‘advocacy’.
it is a mystery why anyone would look at the AGW community with any skepticism.
It’s no mystery why I can confidently call you a liar.
It’s no mystery why I can confidently call you a liar.
Of course it’s not a mystery. Any anonymous asshole troll can confidently call someone who actually uses their real name a liar on the Internet.
I think it’s called evidence, Rand. Michael Mann is going to give you some lessons on that subject soon, lol. So don’t listen to your lawyers and just keep talking.
I’ll believe it when I see people dumping their luxury coastal Florida condos and buying land is ‘Sconsin . . .
If the state didn’t step in and start backing insurance, you wouldn’t be able to
get insurance for hurricanes in Florida at all. Rand was complaining about how
much insurance costs in Florida, when it really is the market working.
I have heard good things about this app, https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.quoord.tapatalkpro.activity
This authoritarianism tends to happen with an over-educated elite class.
No, they’re not overl-educated. They’re over-credentialed. When you get down to it, they’re really not very intelligent despite, or perhaps because of, all those degrees behind their names. Intelligence is different from being “book smart*” and is itself short of wisdom.
*Being “book smart” is all well and good but it depends on which books you read. Someone who is “book smart” on socialism and believes it’s a good idea is still a moron.
Some ideas are so stupid that only intellectuals believe them.
George Orwell
O/T
I see Steyn is suing Mann for 10 million.
I interpret it as a strategy to prepare the ground for a plea of insanity by Steyn in the current case.
I expect it’ll work.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/02/21/steyn-countersues-mann-for-10-millon-dollars/#comment-1573470
Perhaps Steyn wants to so annoy the judge, the judge says something intemperate
and gets removed.
“Mann’s object being to use the process as a punishment, rather than any eventual trial and conviction. ”
Hard to argue that isn’t the case. A good lawyer should have told Mann his suit is a long shot at best. A counter suit is entirely appropriate.
Case is no longer a Long Shot, the case has survived a SLAPP hearing.
Now perhaps the Defense has a valid defense, but, the Plaintiff has shown
that they are “Likely” to succeed on the merits.
No, it hasn’t, you moron. It is being appealed.
Heck, at one point the judge had the plaintiff and defendants backwards.
The case against Courtney Love went to trial too. Saying that a suit is going to court means that it is likely to win is pretty stupid. I wasn’t aware that plaintiffs have a 100% success rate.
Saying that a suit is going to court means that it is likely to win is pretty stupid.
Well, you have to consider the source. And as I pointed out, the case is not going to court, until the appellate court rules.
“I interpret it as a strategy to prepare the ground for a plea of insanity by Steyn in the current case.”
Lol. That is pretty funny.
IMO, in a non-joking context, Mann is the one exhibiting signs of mental illness. He is delusional and manipulative. His behavior doesn’t seem to be moderated at all by the seriousness of the situation he has put himself and the defendants in.
Steyn wil win that lawsuit quite easily, but I doubt he’ll get the full amount he is seeking.
His filing is a thing of beauty. Rand should perhaps join in. Perhaps Tim Ball and everyone else Mann has tried to silence should get on board, too.
It’s humorous elements may be appealing to you and I, but it hasn’t been drafted by a lawyer, and I doubt would be approved by a lawyer, so I predict a court won’t take it seriously because of those points, and because much of it is a claim to damages based on the courts ruling that:
“122.
This action is barred by the DC Anti-SLAPP Law, DC Code
$ 16-5501, et seq. ”
So on this point Steyn is suing Mann based on a court ruling in Mann’s favor, nutty or what?
The judge hadn’t realized that Mann’s claims were fabricated (aka “lies”), and if Mann keeps that up he could find himself behind bars for perjury, perhaps sharing a cell with Jerry Sandusky.
What I find amusing is that Steyn will almost certainly win both cases, and then all the little global warming Nazis will contribute to Mann’s “defense”, and the money will go directly to Steyn. That will make the environmentalists far and away the largest funders of the “denialist” movement. ^_^
I can see where Mr Spencer is coming from but I don’t think it will do him any favors.
From Bad Astronomy:
Bonus: Spencer himself (with David Legates) wrote an op-ed in the Christian Post saying, “we deny ‘that most of it is human-caused, and that it is a threat to future generations that must be addressed by the global community.’” [Emphasis mine.] Huh. Doctor, heal thyself.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy.html
There you go, Spencer proclaiming he’s a denier.