Where Holocaust Denial is legal, but Doubting Climate Change shall not be
Since 2010 we have seen repression, American style via the IRS actions over the Tea Party’s success at the voting booth and at the grassroots level. The IRS punishes by process, trials not needed. And now we take that which is supposed to honor fact and data taking the part of those curing by force those who find the theories of climate change to be short of the definition of the word, THEOREM.
The science on global warming is settled, so settled that 20 climate scientists are asking President Barack Obama to prosecute people who disagree with them on the science behind man-made global warming. Scientists from several universities and research centers even asked Obama to use the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) to prosecute groups that “have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change, as a means to forestall America’s response to climate change.” RICO was a law designed to take down organized crime syndicates, but scientists now want it to be used against scientists, activists and organizations that voice their disagreement with the so-called “consensus” on global warming. The scientists repeated claims made by environmentalists that groups, especially those with ties to fossil fuels, have engaged in a misinformation campaign to confuse the public on global warming. “The actions of these organizations have been extensively documented in peer-reviewed academic research and in recent books,” the scientists wrote. But these riled up academics aren’t the first to suggest using RICO to go after global warming skeptics. The idea was first put forward by Rhode Island Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, who argued using RICO was effective at taking down the tobacco industry. “In 1999, the Justice Department filed a civil RICO lawsuit against the major tobacco companies… alleging that the companies ‘engaged in and executed — and continue to engage in and execute — a massive 50-year scheme to defraud the public, including consumers of cigarettes, in violation of RICO,’” Whitehouse wrote in the Washington Post in May. This year has been a trying one for global warming skeptics. Earlier this year, Democratic lawmakers began an investigation into scientists who disagreed with the White House’s stance on global warming. Many of these skeptical scientists were often cited by those critical of regulations to curb greenhouse gas emissions. Arizona Democratic Rep. Raul Grijalva went after universities employing these researchers, which resulted in one expert being forced to get out of the field of climate research altogether. “I am simply not initiating any new research or papers on the topic and I have ring-fenced my slowly diminishing blogging on the subject,” Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. of the University of Colorado wrote on his blog. “Congressman Grijalva doesn’t have any evidence of any wrongdoing on my part, either ethical or legal, because there is none,” Pielke wrote. “He simply disagrees with the substance of my testimony – which is based on peer-reviewed research funded by the US taxpayer, and which also happens to be the consensus of the IPCC (despite Holdren’s incorrect views).” Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2015/09/17/scientists-ask-obama-to-prosecute-global-warming-skeptics/#ixzz3m6vBDe8o
- The Science Is Settle On Anthropocentric Globull Warming
Scientists don't believe in it. Not the Meteorologists. Not the Geologists. Not the Engineers. Nor the Weathermen who are, themselves, Meteorologists. The consensus shows, the Science is settled. And, it's Peer-Reviewed:Don’t look now, but...
- The Climategate Effect
It's dawning on me just how damaging ClimateGate really is. At first I thought it would come and go, a minor blip in the steadfast march toward Controlling Us All In The Name Of Saving Us All. But here's the thing. The more I think about ClimateGate,...
- A Belief In Man-made Climate Change Is A 'fundamentalist Religion'
So says Prof Ian Plimer, climate change sceptic. In my view his arguments against CO2 being the cause of global warming are the most convincing so far. 1. The concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has no effect on climate above 50 parts per...
