Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sciientists Ask Obama To Use Anti-Mafia Laws Against Climate Critics

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Sergio View Post
    You have to actually show how their work, credentials or positions are bollocks, it is not enough just to say so.
    Correct... Although, the fact that many of these "experts" are professors of climate change communication, economics and other non-sciences, is relevant when people are relying on expert opinions because they lack scientific literacy.
    Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
      Problem is that you're losing the PR campaign there. The average citizen believes what they're told by "experts" in a field they have no knowledge or interest in, and the numbers who believe in global warming are certainly high.
      If we were losing the PR campaign, these assholes wouldn't be calling for RICO prosecutions of us.

      The fact is that they are losing the PR campaign, losing badly...

      Estimated % of adults who think global warming is mostly caused by human activities, 2014




      https://environment.yale.edu/poe/v2014/

      Originally posted by Daemon of Decay
      Maybe you'd be better off convincing people that you're right, rather than expecting them to convince themselves?
      Anyone who believes the Gorebot mantra is either too stupid to understand the science, so politically inculcated with quasi-religious environmental zealotry or so professionally invested in this failed hypothesis, that it will take a Kuhnian paradigm shift to convince them.

      Educating idiots and zealots is way below my pay grade and vastly exceeds my limits of patience. However, ridiculing morons is fun, easy and a good way to kick back and relax.
      Last edited by The Doctor; 18 Oct 15, 13:16.
      Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by ljadw View Post
        All these belong to the environment mafia :global warming is their living : the more global warming ,the better : it provides them millions and it strokes their ego and they suffer no opposition,after all they are Liberals whose aim is to make the live of other people intolerable .
        No argument here.
        Trying hard to be the Man, that my Dog believes I am!

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
          If we were losing the PR campaign, these assholes wouldn't be calling for RICO prosecutions of us.

          The fact is that they are losing the PR campaign, losing badly...

          <snip>

          Anyone who believes the Gorebot mantra is either too stupid to understand the science, so politically inculcated with quasi-religious environmental zealotry or so professionally invested in this failed hypothesis, that it will take a Kuhnian paradigm shift to convince them.

          Educated idiots and zealots is way below my pay grade and vastly exceeds my limits of patience. However, ridiculing morons is fun, easy and a good way to kick back and relax.
          So about a third to little over a half believe? Funny then that the believers/disbelievers seem to fit their political ties - red states are more disbelieving than blue states. That doesn't seem like they're losing "badly" from where I sit - the lowest seems to be in the mid-30s.

          Seems like one could draw a connection to belief in/against global warming as a reflection of political belief and not scientific knowledge. I imagine it's very plausible that there are plenty of skeptics and global warming doubters who are just as uninformed and unintelligent as their gorebot opposites - they just happen to be believing the right thing for political reasons.

          But more importantly, my comment had more to do with shifting views, not the view at the moment. How many Americans believed in man-made global warming 10 years ago? 20?

          The fact is that while it shouldn't be a political issue, it is. The science is irrelevant to many people on both sides.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
            So about a third to little over a half believe? Funny then that the believers/disbelievers seem to fit their political ties - red states are more disbelieving than blue states. That doesn't seem like they're losing "badly" from where I sit - the lowest seems to be in the mid-30s.

            Seems like one could draw a connection to belief in/against global warming as a reflection of political belief and not scientific knowledge. I imagine it's very plausible that there are plenty of skeptics and global warming doubters who are just as uninformed and unintelligent as their gorebot opposites - they just happen to be believing the right thing for political reasons.

            But more importantly, my comment had more to do with shifting views, not the view at the moment. How many Americans believed in man-made global warming 10 years ago? 20?

            The fact is that while it shouldn't be a political issue, it is. The science is irrelevant to many people on both sides.
            Surveys of scientists also demonstrate strong correlations with politics. This is due to the fact that climate science was hijacked by politicians in 1988.

            There has been very little shift in public opinion over the past 15-25 years...





            While Gallup's sampling show a higher percentage of believers, it has been stable...



            Rasmussen's results are more consistent with Yale's...

            http://m.rasmussenreports.com/public...global_warming
            Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

            Comment


            • #36
              The title of the above cited article differs a bit from that of the OP/thread;
              Critics probe scientist who asked Obama to use anti-Mafia laws to silence climate-change skeptics

              And the last two paragraphs of the quote shown also give a clue that the RICO gate can swing both ways;


              QUOTE:
              "

              The letter prompted critics to look into the finances of the Institute of Global Environment and Society, one of the organizations Shukla heads at George Mason. They accused the decorated Shukla of fiscal funny business, including potential double-dipping.
              Then the Republican chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology kicked the controversy to a higher level on Oct. 1 by sending a letter to Shukla informing him of a committee investigation into the management of federal money granted to IGES. "



              As we see from a page of the IGES website, the guv'mint(taxpyer) fund$ have provided jobs for the Shukla family and IGES would seem to have a pre-determined agenda (21?) as it's goal;
              http://grads.iges.org/aboutiges.html


              Why let a good racket go to waste, when setting up other related orgs can enhance the skim/scam/cashflow?
              Center for Ocean-Land-Atmosphere Studies - COLA
              Center for Research on Environment and Water (CREW).


              Of course the advocates of ACC/AGW would do this work even if they weren't outrageously overpaid for their scam, would do it for nothing just to save "mother Earth" ...

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Cambronnne View Post
                This reminds me of how Copernicus was prosecuted for being an "Earth is the center of the universe denier".
                Shows us just how much the human mind has matured over the intervening time, no?

                GG
                "The will of a section rooted in self interest, should not outweigh the vital interests of a whole people." -Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain-

                "Fanatics of any sort are dangerous." -GG-

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Grognard Gunny View Post
                  Shows us just how much the human mind has matured over the intervening time, no?

                  GG


                  Heretics need to be burned now and then so we don't get the idea that we can think for ourselves.
                  Avatar is General Gerard, courtesy of Zouave.

                  Churchill to Chamberlain: you had a choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor, and you will have war.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    ExxonMobil should file a RICO lawsuit against the "Shukla 20" and this *******...
                    Exxon Knew Everything There Was to Know About Climate Change by the Mid-1980s—and Denied It
                    And thanks to their willingness to sucker the world, the world is now a chaotic mess.

                    By Bill McKibben YESTERDAY 12:13 PM

                    A few weeks before the last great international climate conference—2009, in Copenhagen—the e-mail accounts of a few climate scientists were hacked and reviewed for incriminating evidence suggesting that global warming was a charade. Eight separate investigations later concluded that there was literally nothing to “Climategate,” save a few sentences taken completely out of context—but by that time, endless, breathless media accounts about the “scandal” had damaged the prospects for any progress at the conference.


                    Now, on the eve of the next global gathering in Paris this December, there’s a new scandal. But this one doesn’t come from an anonymous hacker taking a few sentences out of context. This one comes from months of careful reporting by two separate teams, one at the Pulitzer Prize–winning website Inside Climate News, and other at the Los Angeles Times (with an assist from the Columbia Journalism School). Following separate lines of evidence and document trails, they’ve reached the same bombshell conclusion: ExxonMobil, the world’s largest and most powerful oil company, knew everything there was to know about climate change by the mid-1980s, and then spent the next few decades systematically funding climate denial and lying about the state of the science.

                    [...]

                    http://www.thenation.com/article/exx...and-denied-it/

                    They are so desperate to create a tobacco company analogy that they will resort to bald-faced lies.
                    Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      ExxonMobil fires back at Gorebots...
                      ExxonMobil says Climate Research Stories Inaccurate and Deliberately Misleading
                      October 21, 2015

                      IRVING, Texas–(BUSINESS WIRE)–Exxon Mobil Corporation (NYSE:XOM) said today that media and environmental activists’ allegations about the company’s climate research are inaccurate and deliberately misleading.

                      “For nearly 40 years we have supported development of climate science in partnership with governments and academic institutions, and did and continue to do that work in an open and transparent way,” said Ken Cohen, vice president of public and government affairs.

                      “Activists deliberately cherry-picked statements attributed to various company employees to wrongly suggest definitive conclusions were reached decades ago by company researchers. These activists took those statements out of context and ignored other readily available statements demonstrating that our researchers recognized the developing nature of climate science at the time which, in fact, mirrored global understanding.”

                      The allegations were contained in reports distributed by InsideClimate News, an anti-oil and gas activist organization, and the Los Angeles Times, and have prompted political attacks by Senators Bernie Sanders and Sheldon Whitehouse and Representatives Ted Lieu and Mark DeSaulnier.

                      [...]

                      http://boereport.com/2015/10/21/exxo...ly-misleading/
                      Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
                        As we see from a page of the IGES website, the guv'mint(taxpyer) fund$ have provided jobs for the Shukla family and IGES would seem to have a pre-determined agenda (21?) as it's goal;
                        http://grads.iges.org/aboutiges.html

                        You can usually tell when a research organization is useless. Their "stuff" is pumped full of platitudes and meaningless phrases that make them sound important / better:

                        (bold / italics mine)

                        The institute has established a second center of excellence dedicated to basic research
                        The goal of CREW research is to quantify and predict water cycle and environmental consequences of earth system variability and change through focused research investments in observation, modeling, and application. CREW research integrates across traditional disciplines to develop an end-to-end program that transitions theoretical research to academic/public education and real-world application,
                        What does any of that really mean?

                        The Institute interacts with climate research institutions in the U.S. and throughout the world. Fruitful collaborations have been undertaken with institutes...
                        If they were truly "fruitful" they'd have listed their accomplishments rather than use platitudes as a substitute.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X