Anti-Science: Those Who Wish to Debate Climate Threatened with Death or Jail

George Washington's picture

Preface:  The scientific method requires allowing a free-for-all of hypotheses, which then rise or fall based upon the results of actual experiments.  In other words, science means that you throw out theories - no matter how good they look on paper - that are disproven by experimental results, and adopt those confirmed by the results. [Economics is supposed to do that, too ... but hasn't.]

For example, imprisoning Galileo for life because he didn't agree with the "accepted" consensus that the Sun revolved around the Earth was not a great example of the scientific method. Instead of conducting experiments to see whether the Earth or Sun were the center of the Solar System, those with the prevailing view simply silenced the dissenter.

Anyone who has studied the history of science knows that many theories that were universally accepted and “known” to be true turned out to be false.   See these examples from the Houston Chronicle and the Guardian.


Noam Chomsky said years ago that he would submit to fascism if it would help combat global warming:

Suppose it was discovered tomorrow that the greenhouse effects has been way understimated, and that the catastrophic effects are actually going to set in 10 years from now, and not 100 years from now or something. Well, given the state of the popular movements we have today, we’d probably have a fascist takeover-with everybody agreeing to it, because that would be the only method for survival that anyone could think of. I’d even agree to it, because there’s just no other alternatives right now.”

In 2006, Grist called for Nuremberg-style trials for climate skeptics.  (The article was later retracted.)

Environmentalist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. lashed out at global warming skeptics in 2007, declaring “This is treason. And we need to start treating them as traitors.”

In 2007, a UN official – Yvo de Boer – warned that ignoring warming would be ‘criminally irresponsible’ Excerpt: The U.N.’s top climate official warned policymakers and scientists trying to hammer out a landmark report on climate change that ignoring the urgency of global warming would be “criminally irresponsible.”

The same year, another UN official – UN special climate envoy Dr. Gro Harlem Brundtland – said “it’s completely immoral, even, to question the UN’s scientific consensus on climate.

In 2008, prominent Canadian environmentalist David Suzuki called for government leaders skeptical of global warming to be “thrown into jail.”

The same year, British journalism professor Alex Lockwood said that writers questioning global warming should be banned.

In 2009, a writer at Talking Points Memo advocated that global warming “deniers” be executed or jailed. (He later retracted the threat.)

James Lovelock – environmentalist and creator of the “Gaia hypothesis” – told the Guardian in 2010:

We need a more authoritative world. We’ve become a sort of cheeky, egalitarian world where everyone can have their say. It’s all very well, but there are certain circumstances – a war is a typical example – where you can’t do that. You’ve got to have a few people with authority who you trust who are running it. And they should be very accountable too, of course.


But it can’t happen in a modern democracy. This is one of the problems. What’s the alternative to democracy? There isn’t one. But even the best democracies agree that when a major war approaches, democracy must be put on hold for the time being. I have a feeling that climate change may be an issue as severe as a war. It may be necessary to put democracy on hold for a while.

Earlier this month, an assistant philosophy professor at Rochester Institute of Technology said he wants to send people who disagree with him about global warming to jail.

And there are many other examples of threats made in regard to the climate debate.

Postscript:  If we can’t have free speech and an open scientific debate, then we are no longer living in a democracy or a society which follows the scientific method. Threatening scientific debate is anti-science and anti-liberty.

It is especially troubling given the background of climate discussions.  Specifically, in the 1970s, many American scientists were terrified of an imminent ice age.   Obama’s top science advisor – John Holdren – was one of them.  Holdren and some other scientists proposed pouring soot over the arctic to melt the ice cap and so prevent the dreaded ice age.   Holdren warned of dire consequences – including starvation and the largest tidal wave in history – if mankind did not rally on an emergency basis to stop the coming ice age.

Were those who questioned the likelihood of an imminent ice age also threatened with death or imprisonment?

Moreover, it is also concerning that many of the “solutions” proposed to combat a changing climate could do more harm than good (and see this).    That’s sort of like invading Iraq after 9/11 because we had to “do” something…

Let’s say that – hypothetically – 100% of all climate scientists reached a consensus that manmade global warming from carbon dioxide was an imminent threat.   Shouldn’t we choose approaches that actually work – and which do more good than harm (more) – instead of messing things up even further?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
FredFlintstone's picture

Flakmeister is to science what Fonestar is to investing.

blindman's picture

when we have a bubble in stupidity and have
reached peak stupidity there is only one solution,
moar not less; or is that less not moar?

taketheredpill's picture


Because Special Interest groups (TBTB) control the media, or at least the media where 99.9% of the populations gets it's "information" we have a problem.

The problem being that the media describes Climate Change as a debate that is approximately 50%/50%, whereas in fact 99.9% of the world's scientists (the other 0.1% are Corporate whores similar to the Lung Cancer apologists that got pimped by the tobacco companies decades ago) that understand Global Climate science believe that Climate Change is man made and getting worse.

This dis-information serves to muddy the waters and maintain the status quo.  By the time it becomes obvious to anybody that there is a problem it will be too late to do anything besides blame it on the Chinese or the Muslims.

By this time the ultra-rich will be esconced in far away land like Ecuador or New Zealand or else under climate domes surrounded by shark-filled moats (with lasers on their heads).

Capitalism does what it does very, very efficiently.




TheReplacement's picture

If by capitalism you mean central banking and economic planning that disproportionately favors the already rich, otherwise known as socialism, then yes, capitalism does that very well indeed.

Please name a single country that actually practices capitalism.  The USA has not truly done so in my life time - going all the way back to the cold war.

Flakmeister's picture

Orwell was correct...

People are starting to completely flip the meanings of words....

And you are a perfect example of a sheeple lining up for his two-minutes hate completely oblivious what is really going on...

combatsnoopy's picture

you can't even contrast the "anti-tobacco" vs. Climate Change.  They're both price inelastic taxes.

There was an article libeling e-cigs.  I don't smoke them, I've been around people who do and I couldn't even smell them.

They're trying to outlaw e-cigs for no reason and the carbon credit scam pushed gas prices up to $5/gallon.  So why does the tobacco tax even matter?


Nicotine addiction is supposed to be eased with nicotinimide.  Or niacin.  Or wellbutrin.

Nope!  The uglies who are the Clinton supporters (and why are Clintonites all so homely?)  won't even share the nicotinimide.  These trolls still don't know the difference between insulin and glucose levels.  Or riboflavin absorption (aided by niacin and other things good for the thyroid) vs. high insulin levels when you consume omega 3. 

These monkies are NOT good at science.    Go on Google or Baidu if they haven't censored that yet- and look up the actual research itself and VET THE RESEARCH.

So I responded to the golddigger filled yay area shillemedia by calling a sock monkey rightfully a nazi and a stasi con artist for this proposed ban, the shark fin and foie gras ban, the incessantly high traffic ticket prices during times of high unemployment and unaffordable rent that was spawned by THEIR boomer hero Bill Clinton.  Bill Clinton who was (ugggh!) in LA this past weekend? Blech.   These idiots who might know the words "Sarbanes Oxley" failed basic math.   And they somehow hold ivy league degrees in something.  Like polisci or theater.

I am banned from Facebook for another few hours.    Woe is me!  I get to miss out on 4 hours of horribly screenwritten propoganda by some affirmative action trophy and their stupid self loathing Saul Alinsky asswipes.

I already sent facebook a personalized letter calling them out on their violations of the 8th and 4th Amendment because of the revolving door between them and the US Government represented by Ms. Sheryl "billionaiare PARASITE "feminist" work life balance" Sandberg.  

Yes GOLDDIGGERS infitrated the Yay Area.  The gold diggers are not just alimony seekers, they're realtors, lobbyists, politicrats, baby boomer thieves....

So yes things are INCREDIBLY shitty thanks to the boomer voting majority.  Garcetti is actually exploiting the messed up streets and sidewalks to increase the city taxes  When L.A.'s taxes are already sky high. 

LA has already paid some of the highest property taxes and the taxes they already took out of the pre-carbon credit taxed gas didn't go to the roads.  It was obviously embezzled.   The cops are not blocking crimes committed by mortgage sponsored blockbustered BEANERS.  They're violating the 8th Amendment. 

The only difference between a cop in Mexico and a cop in California is that the cops in Mexico stop robbing  you when they get all of the cash in your wallet.  Californian cops will indebt you to JP Morgan. 

You should see some of the "young and upcoming" professionals too.  THe friendly ones are severe narcissists who don't care where the public sector funds show up without a private sector.  The others only think that they're "hot messes"-largely backstabbing ugly people who could stand to lose 25 pounds each.  The California public school system set them up to cheat, not to succeed.  It's too obvious, many couldn't spell their American names if their lives depended on it.    If you really want to know what happened to this country---it rewards negativity at the expense of people who were good to others.   This is kind of why I prefer a "REPUBLIC" to a "DEMOCRACY".   Reality works that way and as physics has proven, things work better when we address reality. 


These turds will vote for more equity lines on real estate values that don't exist to comp the carbon credit scam at the expense of other people.  Because personal accountability is not allowed to work in Boomer Utopia.  

In Weho, i believe that it's still trendy to hate Obama.  I thought it was cliche' by now.  Wait, I'm not a Gore sucking Phelps apologizing sock puppet.  Politics is showbiz for ugly people and the politicrats are bitter for obvious reasons.

That's all I have to say about that.

Flakmeister's picture

You completely missed the point...

The same cast of characters are involved...

That is the real conspiracy....

Exhibit A:

Ocean22's picture

Here's what we know:

Something weird IS happening to the climate.

It's either the sun( cooling phase )
The amount of co2 ( burning fossil fuel )
Man made. ( HARRP and aluminum spraying in atmosphere )

Some other Unknown cycle.

But the tell is that "they" would want to jail you for opposing it.

trader1's picture

there are some beneifts of going to jail:


  1. free shelter
  2. free food and water
  3. free health care
  4. free gay (rough) sex
  5. free education
  6. free tv/internet
  7. free gym and sporting facilities



kellycriterion's picture

Ol Flaky isn't that good of a flack. The really important objective is to deflect attention from the political class. The people who specialize in taking, cost shifting, snake oil, who are willing to burn through any amount of resources to fund their operations.

He should know he needs to stay on the offensive. Attack the criminal associates down the food chain. Divide and conquer, bait and switch, false alternatives, take credit, shift blame, accuse others of what you do. Forget defense.

Flakmeister's picture

The criminals are those that fund merchants of FUD so as to maintain their influence, power and wealth....

Funny how the exact same cast of characters as those that claimed smoking was safe are behind this....

moneybots's picture

The global warming alarmists are getting desperate.  That is why they want to stop debate.


There hasn't been any warming of the lower troposphere in 17 years.  No scientist predicted that.



bshirley1968's picture

This is just a modern sophisticated form of paganism.

The Earth is the temple, Mother Nature is the god, the Scientist are the priest, and every false religion needs some knee cappers to enforce the lies of the false religion.

We know they are lying and manipulating.  Today to refute the snake oil scientist, it helps if you have your own electron microscope or Hubble telescope.  They like to "prove" their theories with things the common person cannot "see" or have access to.  Everytime I get in a discussion with a evolutionist, they pull out the microscopic crap becasue that is the only place they have "seen" some evidence that the rest of us cannot.  (To all evolutionist out there, I am not here to debate that topic right now. You just believe what you want and I will believe what I want.)  All this way out there claims that the average person has no way of verifying.  Its like not knowing anything about how a car works and going to a mechanic who tells you what he wants to and you have know way  of refuting it.

Then the schools are their educational temples where they convince the weakminded children that they need not think or decide for themselves because the smart people have already figured it all out for them.  They (the sheeple) just need to obey.  It is sickening to say the least.  ......but I digress.

trader1's picture

it's amusing how you distinguish yourself from "the sheeple", when you are one of them.  

as a matter of fact, most people are "sheeple"...they just wouldn't want to admit it.

there are very few shepherds, and you are definitely no shepherd.

or, maybe you're a wolf in sheep's clothing...

bluskyes's picture

Of course the centuries long knowledge of the correlation between sunspot activity, and global temperatures is ignored.

Ocean22's picture

I agree. Amazing evidence to support this theory. Check out suspicious observers on you tube.

highwaytoserfdom's picture

you know if you doubt the model for global warming or even question the np complete global warming your unscientific   terrorist criminal but if you bring up anything about JP5 airplane fuel. or finite element annalists on steel structure or computational  fluid dynamics or thermal profiles of well defined problem limits you are also terrorist.    Guess we are all under house arrest.

bluskyes's picture

There's nothing else left to tax, so they're trying to tax the air we breathe. If that isn't an indication of the current power structure's unsustainability - nothing is.

Environmentalism is just a religion for athiests.

bshirley1968's picture

Step it up, bluskyes.

It ain't about the money.  They can print that any time, for any reason, in any amount.  IT IS about the control.

It is NOT the economy "stupid" (not you, just using a quote).  People need to get their heads out of their pocket books and realize there is more at stake here than a job, paycheck, taxes or retirement.  So many of the elite have more money than they could spend. Really!  What the hell are you going to buy with $10 billion that you don't already have?  Then why do they keep coming?  Because the ability to control people (what they say, where they go, what they eat, what they have, what they do,...... what they freakin' think) is the ultimate power high on this planet.  Even better when you dumb them down and they obey and worship you of their own free will.

Have you ever asked whey it was necessary for the founders to give us that "free speech" thing in writing?  Because other than the little blip on the screen of history called the US, PEOPLE HAVEN'T HAD IT!

Control, control, control.  You may not want it or understand it but DO NOT discount is as the motivating force of what we are up against.

bluskyes's picture

Absolutely! Money is just a tool used to control others. There is nothing like getting someone in debt, to make them tow the party line. Once they are in debt, they are no longer able to think for themselves, and their whole life revolves around making payments. This prevents them from having both the time, and testicular fortitude to engage in critical thought processes.

joego1's picture

I'm sure that there are plenty of folks in the fossil fuel companies who wouldn't mind quietly removing a few folks themselves.

bshirley1968's picture

There is always a prick like you out there on any debate that wants to make one side's wrong okay because the other side is also doing something wrong.

Because Bush did it, it is okay if Obama does it.  Or since Bush did it and we did nothing about it, Obama can do it without consequense.  Then of course we get nowhere except these power hungry pricks doing whatever they want because the guy before them did it.  That is BS logic!

The reason we have laws that cover principles of life is because there are wicked greedy men on both sides of EVERY issue.  I have given this illustration soooooo many times.  I wish some of you would pay attention.

I don't care how well a fighter has trained or prepared is conditioned or even bigger and stronger than his opponent, when the ref (the gov) has been bought off, the match has been decided long ago.  Our government has been bought off and we cannot trust any results or data from either side.  To be the keeper of the law, right and justice you must be unbiased (as much as possible) and that cannot happen when we allow billions of fed and corporate money to flow to the whores in DC.  That is why we cannot get true, just laws that protect the rights of the individual without somehow destroying the rights of others.  Neither can we get proper enforcement of the true and just laws we have.  This brings us to the point where everyone hates the law in general, and then the lawless mafia bastards really come in and take is happening right now.  They use the law to destroy their enemy and competition or anyone who would stand against them.  Give a gangsta a tommy gun and get blood in the streets.  Give a gangsta a mayor's seat, govenorship, congressial or senate seat, and you become pillaged, plundered, and enslaved.

Will we ever quit bickering amoung ourselves, recognize the real enemy, come together and do something about it?  THAT is the monumental task that will require nothing short of a miracle to accomplish.

joego1's picture

"There is always a prick like you out there on any debate that wants to make one side's wrong okay because the other side is also doing something wrong."

That's part of the debate which in this case certainly has nothing to do with science. In true science any idea is constantly questioned and that what leads to new breakthroughs. Things we though were unquestionably true often turn out to be illusion and then a new door is opened. Of course there are always those who defend the status quo and that is only human. The biggest part of the problem here is that in general polution of the planet of all sorts is certainly causing problems for the human plight but a general lack of faith in the system to correct it is leading to a lot of denial of the fact the truck is stuck in the ditch.

clagr's picture

Maybe we should all stop breathing. Remember we all exhale C O2


dexter_morgan's picture

It's all about the funding.

SameAsItEverWas's picture

Umm. We are no longer living in a democracy?

Or.  Maybe we never had a real democracy here.  Yup, thass  it!

RevRex's picture

Go fuck yourself GW, Bush has nothing to do with this.





Note how spineless cowards show the "courage" to downarrow, yet cower from explaining Bush's culpability......sniveling cowards are like that!

Mi Naem's picture

"For example, imprisoning Galileo for life because he didn't agree with the "accepted" consensus that the Sun revolved around the Earth was not a great example of the scientific method. Instead of conducting experiments to see whether the Earth or Sun were the center of the Solar System, those with the prevailing view simply silenced the dissenter."

This is crap.  It is not what happened, it is not the way it happened. Any 8th grader can look up the facts as to the actual sequence of real events in the Galileo matter and know better than this if they wished to. 

GW is in a great search for the truth except when it is inconvenient. 

Dewey Cheatum Howe's picture

And to go with this topic.

On our Friday Funny, which pointed out that Dr. Michael Mann labeled Greenpeace co-founder Dr. Patrick Moore as a “garden variety troll”, we thought it was funny that Dr. Mann couldn’t make the connection to who he was labeling.  But then, something funny happened on the way to the forum; we discovered that Greenpeace had been actively erasing Dr. Moore from their history page.

It’s just like the famous communist propaganda photo series The Commissar Vanishes

Thank goodness for the Wayback machine.


And even Wikipedia notices the effort to erase Dr. Moore. From this comment (bold mine):

According to Greenpeace: How a Group of Ecologists, Journalists, and Visionaries Changed the World by Rex Wyler, the Don’t Make a Wave Committee was formed in January 1970 by Dorothy and Irving Stowe, Ben Metcalfe, Marie and Jim Bohlen, Paul Cote, and Bob Hunter and incorporated in October 1970.[6] The Committee had formed to plan opposition to the testing of a one megaton hydrogen bomb in 1969 by the United States Atomic Energy Commission on Amchitka Island in the Aleutians. Moore joined the committee in 1971 and, as Greenpeace co-founder Bob Hunter wrote, “Moore was quickly accepted into the inner circle on the basis of his scientific background, his reputation [as an environmental activist], and his ability to inject practical, no-nonsense insights into the discussions.”[7] From as early as September 2005 until its alteration in March 2007, the Greenpeace International web site included Patrick Moore in a list of “founders and first members”.[8][9][10]


So, Greenpeace is desperate to re-write their own history…


Why would Greenpeace do such a thing, erasing a founding member?

It is likely because Dr. Patrick Moore has become a climate skeptic, and appeared in a skeptic film in 2007.


And perhaps most infuriating to the greens, he advocates for improving the third world with the introduction of Golden Rice, which the GMO activists in Greenpeace see as an evil thing.


Since Greenpeace (Climate Science)  is now a multi-million dollar industry, we can’t have idealistic former founders mucking up what they want their donors to believe. I wonder how long it will be before we hear Greenpeace was actually founded by one person?


CH1's picture

Bullshit doesn't like competition.

shovelhead's picture

If AGW people truly wanted to to something immediate and useful, they would spend 100% of their energy on Hemp legalization and production.

90% of what you see around you could be replaced by a fast growing annual weed that will grow almost anywhere with minimal input.

Walt D.'s picture

Grow your own dope - plant Joe Biden

notadouche's picture

Yes it would be best for the world if we enslave the masses and leave all these problems to a few masters who know better.  If Global Warming were going to devastate in a decade then it's way too late and we might as well party like it's 1999.  If Global Warming is the certain doom that governments claim it is, why then is it allowed to do the offending practice as long as there is a Carbon Tax attached to it.  That tells me that our survival is for sell to the highest bidder and the rest of you can go fuck yourself because not only can you not engage in the offending practice because you can't afford it but your climate is going to still go to hell because the offending action is still allowed to deep pockets.  Hmmm....  I wonder why anyone would view this politicised subject with a jaundiced eye.   

If it's real science then shame on the big money faction that ignores the facts.  If it's a bogus government boondoggle shame on the big money faction that is inventing a new way to abscond with taxpayer dollars for their own greedy purposes.

NO CLEAN HANDS HERE either way you look at it.

lakecity55's picture

You cannot have open debate on this.

Once they get their way with Climate PC, the next step is to sacrifice human beings in the name of Saving the Climate.

You can follow the paths on these things to their logical outcomes.

"But, but, I ride a bicycle! And I am a vegan!"
"We don't care what you ride or what planet you are from. Step into the Disintegrator!"
Actually, this stuff happens when Man begins to worship Himself. Kind of like the Tower of Babel.

g'kar's picture

I can see it coming. Every human on the planet by law wearing a CO2 scrubber facemask. Take it off in undesignated areas and it's off to the re-education camps or the Soylent factories.

Dewey Cheatum Howe's picture

Actually, this stuff happens when Man begins to worship Himself. Kind of like the Tower of Babel.

About sums it up. You forgot the part about coveting thy neighbor's wife or in this case land, labor and resources. 

Ever notice these same chuckleheads are also big into eugenics social or otherwise.


lakecity55's picture


You summed it up better, a general loss of morals.

Think about Germany under the NAZIs. The Aryan Superman was supreme. All other races were inferior. This climate stuff is just one evil step beyond NAZI eugenics: the Entire human race is the threat!

When Man turns away from God/Higher Power, or Morality/Ethics in the case of those who are not religious, Evil is the result of the equation!

What really galls me is the type of people who appoint themselves "better" than the rest of us and self-determine they are superior.

Humanism/Marxism will always fail. Man's Character is flawed. Worshiping anything flawed will always lead to Death. Sometimes, as history has shown us, on massive scales!

The way I understand it, these climate people are actually Pagans, just as superstitious and fearful as their ancient counterparts, worshiping the Earth or The Elements in a vain attempt to placate these false gods. They are no different from the witch-burners of Salem, terrified of the Unknown because of a lack of Faith, Control Freaks who demand everyone else agree with them in order to placate the Darkness in their souls.......Hubris........

AlGore and his ilk are a kamikazi cargo cult.

kaiserhoff's picture

Surprisingly good article, George, thank you.  And yet you can never quite stop Republican bashing. 

"Like Bush Saying “You’re Either With Us or Against Us”

    Which Bush said this, when, and in what context?



kaiserhoff's picture

Actually that's in the tease, not the article.

Probably ilene.  Yuck.

SelfGov's picture

Debate is fine but both of those debating must have a full understanding of the physics behind why humans don't freeze to death when the sun goes down.

If you don't possess that knowledge you know little to nothing about this subject.

Walt D.'s picture

That assumes to debate is about physics. It isn't - it is about money and power. BO want to spent $80 billion on green energy. Money down the toilet. However, the money does not just disappear. This is just an easy way of siphoning off money and giving it to cronies, bundlers, Wall Street, and other special interests.

SelfGov's picture

The debate about whether CO2 has an affect on climate is a physics question that Obama has nothing to do with.

What you want to debate are the proposed and politicized solutions (which will solve nothing) to a very real problem.

SAT 800's picture

This is a false assertion and very dangerous. It leaves the average person in the position of saying to himself, "well, I'll never get all that Physics crap sorted out, so I might as well just go along with these people who say they're scientists".  This idea of human caused global warming can be attacked and destroyed very effectively and completely without knowing any physics at all. Every major statement the global warmers have made can be shown to be false in only a few minutes right on this computer you're writting on. The temperature profiles that were published by the little University Dept. in England that the UN bought to create global warming in the first place seemed strange to an Australian Ciotizen who requested the actual thermometer readings from his own government. It turned out that the temperature changes claimed by the UN committee were false. He published this result. The Russians became interested and looked over their own national temperature records and found out that the temperature changes for Russia that had been published were false. The core claim of the Al Gore crowd is that this is the warmest global temperatue in modern history; it isn't. It was warmer in 900AD; whien the Vikings colonized Greenland, and people grew wine grapes in England. Confronted with the discrepancies, the IPCC said they didn't have the original data, "the dog ate their homework"; then they said, you can't have it anyway. Meanwhile their computer system has been hacked and the "climate models" they made up have been shown to be childish rubbish by professional computer programmers. Michael Mann's famous hockey stick temperature curve is rubbish. He used a computer program that would make a hockey stick out of any data you plugged into it. If you had a viable theory concerning global warming, something you can measure with a thermometer, would you change the name of your propaganda barrage to Climate Change? Of course not; you only try to change your identifying label and your buzz-wrods in desperation. "Climate Change" is not a scientific concept; it can't be measured; it can't be falsified by any measurable data; so you can go on ranting about it indefinitely. Global Warming can be summed up very easily; there isn't any. That's why you have to change the name of the program to something that can't be measured or falsified; global warming has already been falsified. Human Beings tend to be dangerously stupid herd animals, but when you have a powerful government agency claiming that CO2 is a pollutant in the atmosphere, you've got a real problem. This is as sensible and verifiable as the assertion that "Jews" somehow caused Germany's defeat in WW1. It isn't any kind of science; it's government sponsered madness.

SelfGov's picture

You're a great example of somebody who has the right to form an opinion but who's opinion shouldn't be taken seriously by anybody serious about finding the facts.

You're like a self-proclaimed auto-mechanic that hasn't a clue what happens beneath the hood.

Walt D.'s picture

This is one of the best 1 page posts I have read on the subject.


Flakmeister's picture

It is complete and utter rubbish...

adonisdemilo's picture

There seems to be two quite distinct sides to this argument;

One side, by and large, can see a very lucrative and cushy source of funding,

The other side see themselves as having to pay for it.

g'kar's picture

When all the climate fascists lead the way and dump their 50 megawatt per month estates, limosines, private jets, and all their followers stop driving, stop heating their homes, stop turning on their lights, we should be able to see what effect that huge group has on the environment. Give it a generation or two to make sure we get some good data.

I always ask the climate nazis two questions:

1) What greenhouse gas is the largest by volume? (water vapor)

2) What melted all the ice ages that have ever happened? (global warming)

I always get the deer in the headlight stare.




Ban KKiller's picture

AND... what star is MOST responsible for our weather?  Where are we in those cycles? How do solar flares or the lack of them affect us? 

Humans are contributing to weather change but NOTHING compared to the effect our star has.