When warmistas attack

Note: There’s a response and analysis to this post here.

NOTE: Predictably, Joe Romm has turned this post into a personal bashing of me over at his Climate Progress blog. For some eye opening viewpoints from his side of the argument, have a look at the 495 comments on his parent blog “Think Progress” here. UPDATE: many of those ugly and violent comments at TP have been “sanitized” since I drew embarrassing attention to them. The word “filthy” in my post below, is pointing to the multiple use of the word to describe humans in the manifesto of the gunman, also published below. I realize that may upset some people, and for that I apologize. However, it is instructive to read the manifesto to see how global warming hype drove this man to do what he did. From this MSNBC story:

Lee said he experienced an ‘‘awakening” when he watched former Vice President Al Gore’s environmental documentary ‘‘An Inconvenient Truth.”

UPDATE: It’s over, from MSNBC:

Police shot a gunman who held three hostages for several hours Wednesday at the Discovery Communications building in Silver Spring, Md., authorities said. They said the hostages were safe and the gunman was in custody. Police said the gunman’s condition was unknown. At least one explosive device went off when he was shot, and other explosive devices could still be in the building in Montgomery County in suburban Washington, D.C., they said.

UPDATE2: MSNBC is now reporting the gunman has been killed.

=======================================

Well, you filthy readers, see what happens when we don’t acquiesce? In case you haven’t heard by now, a gunman named James Lee, an Asian man with a years-long vendetta against the Discovery Channel cable network has entered the building and got an armed hostage taking situation going on right now.

Some news coverage here:

Armed Man Believed to Be Environmental Protester Takes Hostages in Discovery Channel Building

James Lee

Among his demands from the manifesto on his website:

Find solutions so that people stop breeding as well as stopping using Oil in order to REVERSE Global warming and the destruction of the planet!

MSNBC reports:

Lee said he experienced an ‘‘awakening” when he watched former Vice President Al Gore’s environmental documentary ‘‘An Inconvenient Truth.”

Perhaps inspired by Gore, and Dr. James Hansen’s recent call for civil disobedience, we have today’s environmental public relations train wreck turned armed hostage situation.

THE MANIFESTO OF JAMES LEE:
(downloaded before traffic took it down):PDF here at TMZ

The Discovery Channel MUST broadcast to the world their commitment to save the planet and to do the following IMMEDIATELY:

1. The Discovery Channel and it’s affiliate channels MUST have daily television programs at prime time slots based on Daniel Quinn’s “My Ishmael” pages 207-212 where solutions to save the planet would be done in the same way as the Industrial Revolution was done, by people building on each other’s inventive ideas. Focus must be given on how people can live WITHOUT giving birth to more filthy human children since those new additions continue pollution and are pollution. A game show format contest would be in order. Perhaps also forums of leading scientists who understand and agree with the Malthus-Darwin science and the problem of human overpopulation. Do both. Do all until something WORKS and the natural world starts improving and human civilization building STOPS and is reversed! MAKE IT INTERESTING SO PEOPLE WATCH AND APPLY SOLUTIONS!!!!

2. All programs on Discovery Health-TLC must stop encouraging the birth of any more parasitic human infants and the false heroics behind those actions. In those programs’ places, programs encouraging human sterilization and infertility must be pushed. All former pro-birth programs must now push in the direction of stopping human birth, not encouraging it.

3. All programs promoting War and the technology behind those must cease. There is no sense in advertising weapons of mass-destruction anymore. Instead, talk about ways to disassemble civilization and concentrate the message in finding SOLUTIONS to solving global military mechanized conflict. Again, solutions solutions instead of just repeating the same old wars with newer weapons. Also, keep out the fraudulent peace movements. They are liars and fakes and had no real intention of ending the wars. ALL OF THEM ARE FAKE! On one hand, they claim they want the wars to end, on the other, they are demanding the human population increase. World War II had 2 Billion humans and after that war, the people decided that tripling the population would assure peace. WTF??? STUPIDITY! MORE HUMANS EQUALS MORE WAR!

4. Civilization must be exposed for the filth it is. That, and all its disgusting religious-cultural roots and greed. Broadcast this message until the pollution in the planet is reversed and the human population goes down! This is your obligation. If you think it isn’t, then get hell off the planet! Breathe Oil! It is the moral obligation of everyone living otherwise what good are they??

5. Immigration: Programs must be developed to find solutions to stopping ALL immigration pollution and the anchor baby filth that follows that. Find solutions to stopping it. Call for people in the world to develop solutions to stop it completely and permanently. Find solutions FOR these countries so they stop sending their breeding populations to the US and the world to seek jobs and therefore breed more unwanted pollution babies. FIND SOLUTIONS FOR THEM TO STOP THEIR HUMAN GROWTH AND THE EXPORTATION OF THAT DISGUSTING FILTH! (The first world is feeding the population growth of the Third World and those human families are going to where the food is! They must stop procreating new humans looking for nonexistant jobs!)

6. Find solutions for Global Warming, Automotive pollution, International Trade, factory pollution, and the whole blasted human economy. Find ways so that people don’t build more housing pollution which destroys the environment to make way for more human filth! Find solutions so that people stop breeding as well as stopping using Oil in order to REVERSE Global warming and the destruction of the planet!

7. Develop shows that mention the Malthusian sciences about how food production leads to the overpopulation of the Human race. Talk about Evolution. Talk about Malthus and Darwin until it sinks into the stupid people’s brains until they get it!!

8. Saving the Planet means saving what’s left of the non-human Wildlife by decreasing the Human population. That means stopping the human race from breeding any more disgusting human babies! You’re the media, you can reach enough people. It’s your resposibility because you reach so many minds!!!

9. Develop shows that will correct and dismantle the dangerous US world economy. Find solutions for their disasterous Ponzi-Casino economy before they take the world to another nuclear war.

10. Stop all shows glorifying human birthing on all your channels and on TLC. Stop Future Weapons shows or replace the dialogue condemning the people behind these developments so that the shows become exposes rather than advertisements of Arms sales and development!

11. You’re also going to find solutions for unemployment and housing. All these unemployed people makes me think the US is headed toward more war.

Humans are the most destructive, filthy, pollutive creatures around and are wrecking what’s left of the planet with their false morals and breeding culture.

For every human born, ACRES of wildlife forests must be turned into farmland in order to feed that new addition over the course of 60 to 100 YEARS of that new human’s lifespan! THIS IS AT THE EXPENSE OF THE FOREST CREATURES!!!! All human procreation and farming must cease!

It is the responsiblity of everyone to preserve the planet they live on by not breeding any more children who will continue their filthy practices. Children represent FUTURE catastrophic pollution whereas their parents are current pollution. NO MORE BABIES! Population growth is a real crisis. Even one child born in the US will use 30 to a thousand times more resources than a Third World child. It’s like a couple are having 30 babies even though it’s just one! If the US goes in this direction maybe other countries will too!

Also, war must be halted. Not because it’s morally wrong, but because of the catastrophic environmental damage modern weapons cause to other creatures. FIND SOLUTIONS JUST LIKE THE BOOK SAYS! Humans are supposed to be inventive. INVENT, DAMN YOU!!

The world needs TV shows that DEVELOP solutions to the problems that humans are causing, not stupify the people into destroying the world. Not encouraging them to breed more environmentally harmful humans.

Saving the environment and the remaning species diversity of the planet is now your mindset. Nothing is more important than saving them. The Lions, Tigers, Giraffes, Elephants, Froggies, Turtles, Apes, Raccoons, Beetles, Ants, Sharks, Bears, and, of course, the Squirrels.

The humans? The planet does not need humans.

You MUST KNOW the human population is behind all the pollution and problems in the world, and YET you encourage the exact opposite instead of discouraging human growth and procreation. Surely you MUST ALREADY KNOW this!

I want Discovery Communications to broadcast on their channels to the world their new program lineup and I want proof they are doing so. I want the new shows started by asking the public for inventive solution ideas to save the planet and the remaining wildlife on it.

These are the demands and sayings of Lee.

==============================

h/t to the Seattle Weekly blogs and WUWT DocattheAutopsy


Sponsored IT training links:
We provide up to date 350-030 questions and 70-649 answers for practice so you will pass 220-701 certification exam easily and fast.


About these ads
This entry was posted in Climate News, media and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

344 Responses to When warmistas attack

  1. Fred says:

    Seems like just a run of the mill Warmista . . . .

  2. TomRude says:

    I guess that’s what we train sharpshooters for.

  3. tarpon says:

    Al Gore will be deeply saddened, I am sure.

    Propaganda can affect people …

  4. Geoff says:

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38957020/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/

    Lee said he experienced an ‘‘awakening” when he watched former Vice President Al Gore’s environmental documentary ‘‘An Inconvenient Truth.”

    REPLY: Thanks for the tip, added, Anthony

  5. Dr A Burns says:

    I wonder why he rates “Squirrels” above kangaroos and koalas … the latter didn’t even make it to his list.

  6. W^L+ says:

    Frightening. I hope the police can get this guy the help he needs without any bloodshed.

  7. M.A.DeLuca II says:

    I’ve been waiting for someone like this to show up. Now I’m curious about how he’ll be portrayed in the media. I *suspect* his manifesto will actually get little airtime; not only is it too long and boring for nightly newscasts and newspapers, but it also puts an ugly face on the same pro-socialist, anti-U.S., and anti-human crap the media regularly serves by the heaping spoonful.

  8. Mike M. says:

    Are you surprised? All of the unbalanced minds are on the Alarmist side. Now watch for the reaction of Romm and Hansen and all of the other spittle-flecked lunatics. Will they have the guts to embrace his actions?

  9. mpaul says:

    Quoting from an earlier speech by Nancy Pelosi:

    “I think we all have to take responsibility for our actions and our words. We are a free country and this balance between freedom and safety is one that we have to carefully balance. I saw this myself in the late seventies in San Francisco. This kind of rhetoric was very frightening and it gave–it created a climate in which violence took place. I wish that we all again would curb our enthusiasm in some of the statements that are made, with the understanding that some of the ears this is falling on are not as balanced as the person making the statement might assume.”

    I would hope that she would now admonish the CAGW crowd about the effects of their overblown rhetoric.

  10. JinOH says:

    I had the opposite reaction – I fell asleep after wearing myself out laughing watching Bore’s Power Point presentation – err, movie.

  11. Robbie says:

    A obvious Psyop.

    The global warming movement is in shambles, and at the perfect time, voila! some mind controlled useful idiot takes centre stage, bringing the green message of eugenics back into the limelight.

    Watch how there will be some media sympathy towards this guy, and his “cause”.

    Misson complete.

  12. REPLY: snip – waaaay over the top – Anthony

  13. Robert says:

    The news about the hostage taking is spreading like wildfire, to bad that my former employer (ad.nl) only reports about the hostage taking and not about the motives behind it.

  14. PaulH says:

    I think we should take this sad situation a little more seriously. The guy is armed and obviously psychologically tormented. The enviro-babble is just a side-show at the moment.

  15. Sean says:

    Is he watching the same Discovery Channel programs I’m watching. I often have to change channels when warmist propaganda creeps into an otherwise interesting show. There is a real irony in all this but I also think the Green Party in Australia might have a job for him.

  16. justin says:

    [comment removed by the blog moderator for policy]

  17. Enneagram says:

    But why, if the Discovery Channel already complies with everything he is asking!

  18. For some chuckles, check the headline at Think Progress:

    Purported Eco-Terrorist Angered Over ‘Immigration Pollution And Anchor Baby Filth’ . Just another angry white Asian midwestern Canadian tea-bagger hippie.

    If I rolled my eyes any harder I’d sprain them. The narrative must be screaming and writhing in agony right now…

  19. H.R. says:

    I hope things go OK down at the hostage site. That is a scary, hairy situation and I’d like to see those hostages heading home to their families.

    Keep us posted, will ya? We can make fun of all it later if everything turns out OK.

  20. boballab says:

    I did a quick piece on this on my blog including the Google Cache of Mr. Lees Website:

    The Discovery Channel produces a lot of shows about saving the planet that all have one thing in common: They don’t work. Why don’t they have REAL shows about SAVING THE PLANET? Have you ever noticed the crap they have on their network about just about everything else but that? They glorify fishermen who are overfishing the planet, they glorify Weapons of Mass Destruction. They highlight shows about people who build pollution machines and other environmentally harmful practices. What’s next? Whaling the Planet with Modern Whalers??? These guys have been very sneaky and deceptive as to their contribution to the planetary problems. Just look at their ‘new’ show about saving the planet, “Planet Green,” to me, it’s just another show about more PRODUCTS to make MONEY, not about actual solutions. We can’t let them get away with doing it anymore. Join me in the PROTEST AGAINST THE DISCOVERY NETWORK to get them to start broadcasting real shows that actually work to save the planet. But not just a show about THEM TELLING US WHAT LIGHTBULB TO USE, but shows where solutions are brought to the new shows from people all over with good ideas. This will be a democratic process searching for those with good ideas. Inventiveness has got us into this mess, and now inventiveness can get us out. Not necessarily with more products, but maybe by just being allowed to live a different way.

    If their ‘environmental’ shows are actually working, then why is the news about the environment getting worse? It should be getting better if they were doing their job and we should be seeing that reflected on the nightly news. But NO! The Discovery Channel is actually not about saving the planet, they are just another ‘green’ corporation whose real interests lies in MONEY! Products! Junk! Trash!

    The show they should broadcast is in the book, “My Ishmael” by Daniel Quinn, where he talks about how people can build on each other’s ideas to come up with real solutions for saving the planet. I envisioned it would be like a contest, or competition … maybe a game show? I don’t know, so long as it WORKS! Keep bringing out new shows based on that idea until one actually WORKS! That’s all I ask.

    I know the hours and days for the protest event seems a bit long, but if the Discovery Channel is going to take this protest serious, we need to show them we are serious and are willing to wait them out until they give into our demands.

    Mapquest: Directions to Discovery Channel One Discovery Place, Silver Spring Maryland 20910, near the crossroads of Georgia Ave and Wayne Ave just right off of the Red Line Metro Station. I’ll be there every day demonstrating what shows they can have and how it would work to save this planet from 9am to 9pm February 15-23, 2008. My name is Lee, look for me. Bring a sign and make your voice be heard for a better planet.

    To network and meet other people for the protest, go to Myspace: groups.myspace.com/savetheplanetprotest

    If you don’t have a myspace account and can’t post, then go here to Ezboard: http://savetheplanetprotest.yuku.com/

    And most importantly, go to the author of “My Ishmael,” Daniel Quinn’s site: Ishmael.com.

    http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:dqyY9Ea2WegJ:www.savetheplanetprotest.com/discovery.htm+%22discovery+channel+protest%22&cd=13&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

  21. Gary Pearse says:

    I would have expected him to promote nuclear war if too many people is the problem he sees. Certainly there are too many people of his type.

  22. erik sloneker says:

    I think he and Barbara Boxer would get along quite well, considering her views on partial birth abortion and cAGW. After all, the Delta Smelt trumps 50,000 central valley jobs and orchards that took 20 years to grow and develop.

    As they say on SDA…”scratch a liberal”, or in this case a green activist, and find a person who ultimately wants to eliminate 98% of the worlds population.

  23. eric anderson says:

    We can also credit Dr. James “coal trains of death” Hansen for this, can’t we?

    I don’t know what to term this philosophy. I guess I’d call it anti-humanist. We’re parasites. Polluting, life-sucking parasites. But we’ve got to save the squirrels! The planet does not need humans, but it needs squirrels(?). Definitely not a humanist. He’s a squirrelist.

  24. What a complete idiot. He rails against war but wants humans to be extinct? He doesn’t think the planet needs humans? Well, the forests are healthier in America now then they were before we colonized and who the hell is going to stop a meteor from hitting the planet? The “froggies?”

    Watch this get spun into him being a right-winger since he is against anchor babies.

    Damn enviro-whacko brainwashing propaganda makes people like this.

  25. Gnomish says:

    Tipping point!
    I was expecting it to be joe romm, but obviously joe’s not as devout as this guy.

  26. Somebody on another forum made a good point: This guy claims he was “awakened” by Al Gore’s movie An Inconvenient Truth. Wouldn’t it be ironic if we brought back the hysteria from the 80s where anything bad that anybody did was blamed on the Evil Music that awakened their dark sides and people tried to sue the record companies out of existence? Especially since it was Tipper Gore that started that one… :-)

  27. James Sexton says:

    All that because he can’t get a date? This is what happens when alarmists spew their babbling bs. Some whack job takes it to heart. I hope this has a decent ending.

  28. Dave F says:

    Just to be fair, you can’t hold others accountable for what is a clear case of mental instability on Lee’s part. Just like the nutcase that flew his plane into the IRS building. This guy needs some medication for sure. Also, it is a shame that the alarmist tactics blur the line enough where it can be seen as an honest mistake to associate Mr. Lee and Al Gore. They are two different kinds of crazy. ;)

  29. John W. says:

    But, but …

    He wrote “… keep out the fraudulent peace movements.” So he must be one of those racist, homophobe, Tea Party wingnuts, right?

    Why is it that with all the Left Wing/Democrat hyperventilating about fear of violence by conservatives and Tea Partiers, all the actual violence comes from people who are clearly psychologically disturbed spouting Left Wing talking points?

  30. Ecotretas says:

    The Times They Are A-Changin':

    OT: After comparing Lomborg to Hitler, Pachauri is now endorsing him:

    “This book provides not only a reservoir of information on the reality of human-induced climate change, but raises vital questions and examines viable options on what can be done.”

    Ecotretas
    More links about Lomborg/Pachauri at http://ecotretas.blogspot.com/2010/09/bjorn-lomborg.html (Google translation)

  31. brad says:

    There are also reports that Palin,s new show drove him over the edge from employees at the channel.

  32. Green Sand says:

    A nutter is a nutter, you cannot legislate for nutters, same as you can’t legislate the temperature of this planet.

    Just hope this concludes as peacefully as possible.

  33. Erik says:

    A whole lot of “wow.” This guy certainly went off the deep end. Unfortunately vie had conversations with people who feel the same as him.

  34. Ern Matthews says:

    Sigh :(
    …and so it begins, the final chapter of Mass Madness.

  35. Henry Galt says:

    Pure coincidence? The Google ad running on this page asks “How smart are you?”

    I rest my case.

    /end sarcasm

  36. Enneagram says:

    [comment removed by the blog moderator for policy]

  37. Leon Brozyna says:

    There is so much black humor in this developing tragedy (and his manifesto), that to dwell on it would be in poor taste. Let’s just hope that the police can manage to defuse this nightmare before it blows up. The most I will say for now is that here we see the chickens coming home to roost.

  38. Brego says:

    [comment removed by the blog moderator for policy]

  39. Jimbo says:

    I don’t know where to begin?
    Immigraton: where did he or his family come from?
    Parasitic humans: what is he?
    Arms sales: what is he armed with?
    If you think it isn’t, then get hell off the planet!: what is he still doing on the planet?
    Malthus: Did he forsee the agricultural revolution?

    He wants to achieve his aims via “TV shows that DEVELOP solutions”.
    —-
    You know there will be many environmentalists cheering him on until someone gets hurt. I hope we don’t get to that stage though.

  40. This was clearly due to global warming and a lack of gun control. Democrats will jump right on the fix.

  41. AdderW says:

    “Filth” seems to be the buzz word in the manifesto.

  42. theduke says:

    This gives new meaning to the term “environmental whacko.”

    On the other hand, how much different is he from the rest of those who celebrate the radical green ideology?

  43. Gail Combs says:

    He must have read John Holdren, Obama’s Science Czar’s, book too. http://zombietime.com/john_holdren/

    Given leaders like Gore, Holdren and Hansen I am only surprised this did not happen soon. What is frightening is this may be used by the US government to revoke even more of our freedom. “President Obama’s regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein, argued the U.S. government should ban “conspiracy theorizing.”

    Among the beliefs Sunstein would ban is advocating that the theory of global warming is a deliberate fraud.

    Sunstein also recommended the government send agents to infiltrate “extremists who supply conspiracy theories” to disrupt the efforts of the “extremists” to propagate their theories….”

    Too bad Sunstein targeted the wrong group.

  44. Mark says:

    [comment removed by the blog moderator for policy]

  45. AdderW says:

    He’s been shot and he’s in custody, hostages are safe.

  46. P Walker says:

    Apparently Lee has been shot and taken into custody . Also , thanks to whoever posted the link to Think Progress – the comments really made me shudder .

  47. SteveW says:

    Given his name and ethnicity, point 5 of his manifesto sort of fried my irony circuits.

  48. Jeff Id says:

    REPLY: funny, but, congratulations on winning your first [snip] – Anthony

  49. ben says:

    The environmental movement is corrupt at every level. The fact that a nutter happens to agree with them is neither here nor there. Please don’t fall for the trap of tarring any movement with the actions of a lone extremeist.

  50. HaroldW says:

    Agree fully with ben, above.

    Anthony/moderator – see update at MSNBC site http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38957020/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts
    Apparently Lee has been shot dead.

  51. Curiousgeorge says:

    [comment removed by the blog moderator for policy]

  52. Wucash says:

    This is indeed unfortunate. The man is clearly delusional, irriational, and has clear conviction in his beliefs. What makes matters worse is how he views humans – as filth, parasites, etc. It’s those kind of views that makes me believe that he could be more inclined to kill people if he doesn’t get what he wants.

    And I do hope that this self-serving gloating that some users decided to apply here is kept to a minimum. This is an unhinged mind at work here, not a cause of warmist agenda. Instead, let’s just hope everyone comes out of this unhurt, and the man in question gets the help he needs.

  53. Wucash says:

    …so much for the happy ending.

  54. Greg Cavanagh says:

    There have been too many “call-to-action” comments by warmists in the media, having no rational arguments within them. This is the result. The irationality involved with this guy is mind boggeling. Yet it is what the warmists have been calling for for years. This is a truely disturbing developement, I hope the warmists can recognise their own words in this mans actions.

  55. Robert Field says:

    Seems he has just been shot.

    He advocated diminishing the human population. Ironically, in his own little way, he got a small part of his wish.

    What a waste.

  56. John-X says:

    Latest news, linked at drudgereport.com –

    Mr. James J. Lee today successfully reduced the filthy human presence on Earth by exactly one filthy human (with a little assistance from the SWAT team).

  57. James Sexton says:

    AdderW says:
    September 1, 2010 at 2:28 pm

    He’s been shot and he’s in custody, hostages are safe.

    HaroldW says:
    September 1, 2010 at 2:40 pm

    Agree fully with ben, above.

    Anthony/moderator – see update at MSNBC site http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38957020/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts
    Apparently Lee has been shot dead.
    =========================================================
    Apparently, they have a dead man in custody. Sad and senseless.

  58. Nigel Brereton says:

    Sky News confirms he is dead

  59. DocattheAutopsy says:

    This is all pretty interesting.

    REPLY: [snip] sorry, Over The Top – but thanks for the tip earlier -Anthony

  60. wsbriggs says:

    I’m very saddened to see a human lose their humanity (the mind) in such a disturbing way.

    I disagree vehemently with what he’s spouting. Manic depressive comes to mind, but I’m sure that the professionals who carefully watch him have different terms. He was under care before this episode, wasn’t he?

  61. dbleader61 says:

    Evil Red Scandi says:
    September 1, 2010 at 2:01 pm
    For some chuckles, check the headline at Think Progress:

    Purported Eco-Terrorist Angered Over ‘Immigration Pollution And Anchor Baby Filth’ . Just another angry white Asian midwestern Canadian tea-bagger hippie.

    If I rolled my eyes any harder I’d sprain them. The narrative must be screaming and writhing in agony right now…

    Okay ERS…what’s the shot at Canada (the home of McIntyre and McKitrick) for? You had me looking to see if Mr Lee was in fact from Canada.

  62. joe says:

    Wucash: we got the happy ending. no taxes to pay for his healthcare, court costs, and prison time.

  63. Guido Botteri says:

    He said
    [ Saving the environment and the remaning species diversity of the planet is now your mindset. Nothing is more important than saving them. The Lions, Tigers, Giraffes, Elephants, Froggies, Turtles, Apes, Raccoons, Beetles, Ants, Sharks, Bears, and, of course, the Squirrels.

    The humans? The planet does not need humans. ]
    I know he isn’t the only guy to thnink so, and I’d like to ask to these kind of people:
    if you eliminate humans, who can save those animals ? The horses, perhaps, or the cats ?
    They don’t look able to do it. Only humans can save othe animals.
    In my opinion.

  64. Fred says:

    Rumor has it he was armed with a hockey stick.

  65. DocattheAutopsy says:

    Anthony–

    It was borderline. I guess just north of the border of taste. :)

    Glad everyone at the Discovery Channel is ok though.

  66. Guido Botteri says:

    Sorry, ” thnink” was “think”, and “othe” was “other”.
    Typing errors. I apologize.

  67. Alan Clark says:

    This episode has given me a new understanding of the left’s vehement support for abortion. Is it truly about a woman’s right to choose or just cloaked population control?

  68. Russ Haatch says:

    Perhaps Mr. Cusack and some other celebrities will tone down their rhetoric now. Somehow I doubt it.

  69. philotectes says:

    It is obviously Gore’s fault.

  70. James Sexton says:

    I hope we can all remember, this man, who obviously lost his mind, at least had a mother and a father. We don’t know if they are still alive, and we don’t know if he has brothers or sisters or a wife or children. And we don’t know if any read this site or not. I’m as caustic and sarcastic as the next, but I’ll try to temper my more instinctive reaction in sensitivity to potential loved ones.

    Peace

  71. DocattheAutopsy says:

    @ James Sexton–

    I read a report that had a statement from Lee’s brother-in-law, who said Lee would show erratic behavior quite often. But to have someone in the family go this far off the hook is certainly tragic.

  72. ” Evil Red Scandi says:
    September 1, 2010 at 2:01 pm

    For some chuckles, check the headline at Think Progress:”

    Yep, exactly as I predicted they spun the anchor baby bit into saying he is a right winger. The comments show just how brainwashed their readers are too.

  73. Larry Fields says:

    So much for the image of the peaceful, granola-noshing, eco-hippie, with flowers in his hair. Pardon my bluntness, but it should be obvious by now that 21st Century Environmentalism has precious little to do with national forests, national parks, wilderness areas, clean water, and saving the Giant Panda. This movement has an underbelly that draws inspiration from the Khmer Rouge, and the MSM doesn’t have the backbone to call them on it. But that may change after Mr Lee’s act of terrorism.

  74. Dr. Dave says:

    Obviously this guy was more a mentally unhinged nut job than an “environmentalist”. The eco-babble was just the window dressing wrapped around some serious psychosis. Still, I find it ironic that the Discovery Channel was chosen as his target. Discovery/TLC (and the History Channel too, for that matter) have been shameless promoters of radical environmental drivel. Oh well…it appears this guy got “the help he needed” in the form of police bullets to help him self-actualize his Malthusian dream.

  75. Gail Combs says:

    P Walker says:
    September 1, 2010 at 2:28 pm

    Apparently Lee has been shot and taken into custody . Also , thanks to whoever posted the link to Think Progress – the comments really made me shudder .
    _____________________________________________________
    Interesting how the commentors are blaming the rightwingers for this guy Lee’s problems and when someone actually quotes lee to show they are incorrect his comments get “voted down” and hidden. It is amazing to see such total disregard for the truth in something so simple.

  76. TerryS says:

    The BBC has this story on its website http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11159256
    They mention a protest James Lee held outside the Discovery channel in 2008 when he threw thousands of dollars into the air. The only mention they give to his motives are for the 2008 protest were they say:

    Mr Lee said he threw the money because Discovery’s programming had little to do with saving the planet.

    For once the BBC has a story where they can mention global warming/climate change but fail to do so.

  77. Philip Thomas says:

    Was he one of Obama’s Tzars?

  78. Gail Combs says:

    Greg Cavanagh says:
    September 1, 2010 at 2:46 pm

    There have been too many “call-to-action” comments by warmists in the media, having no rational arguments within them. This is the result. The irationality involved with this guy is mind boggeling. Yet it is what the warmists have been calling for for years. This is a truely disturbing developement, I hope the warmists can recognise their own words in this mans actions.
    _________________________________________________________
    Unfortunately not as shown by Evil Red Scandi comment:

    Purported Eco-Terrorist Angered Over ‘Immigration Pollution And Anchor Baby Filth’ .
    http://thinkprogress.org/2010/09/01/discovery-terrorist-immigration/

    The right-wing conservatives are being blamed already.

  79. TomRude says:

    Reducing carbon footprint should start with those who advocate it.

  80. Milwaukee Bob says:

    He says to humans: the planet does not need you, which is a true statement because “the planet” doesn’t “need” anything, but says: you humans must save the planet and thereby, in HIS mind completely misses? ignores? his previous conclusion of the planet not needing humans. “Humans are the cause of all ills, you humans have to get rid of all them humans!” I find it fascinating that the human mind can separate itself from it’s own humanness.

  81. INGSOC says:

    What surprises me most, is that so far this is the only freak deranged enough to go postal. I have seen first hand just how enraged the eco-deists are becoming due to not having their way. Most truly believed that their time had come with the election of Obama. The feeling of having to act up now to save the planet is growing… As is the case with this sort of thing, copy-cats will likely follow. As the fellow appears to be dead, they now have a “martyr” for the cause. As I have said before; we are entering a very dark age.

    Just imagine what might happen should the Jihadists hook up with the eco-loonies.

  82. Alan F says:

    Jabba the Gore’s “Inconvenient Truth” the new “Catcher in The Rye” for serial eco-terrorists. #1 on Homeland Security’s watch list and The Goricle just couldn’t be happier.

    One a side note, is there a civil suit if one individual perpetuated a lie causing panic of this order?

  83. Gary says:

    Lee seemed to not care too much for people. Froggies are okay, though.

  84. John Whitman says:

    Freaky stuff.

    John

  85. Curiousgeorge says:

    There is really no difference, except in degree, between this Lee character and any number of “Earth First” types who go around blowing up SUV’s, and monkey wrenching logging equipment. All they need is the right motivation to graduate from property destruction to murder, and Mr. Lee just handed it to them. You can bet that all the other Eco-nuts will very shortly make a martyr of him and begin to emulate him.

    Soup’s on, bring your own spoon.

  86. Dr. Dave says:

    I have never visited ThinkProgress before. I took a gander at the comments just for fun. WOW! I never would have believed it if I hadn’t seen it with my own eyes. By some convoluted strain of logic they have pegged this nut case as a conservative!! I didn’t see anything that suggested this guy was a closet denier (although one comment hinted he may be one of their trolls). So most of his demands seemed reasonable until he mentioned immigration filth and anchor baby filth? Amazing!

    Well, I’ve done my slumming for the day. Anyone know if mention has been made on RC?

  87. INGSOC says:

    Just in case, I have downloaded the “manifesto” for future reference, should it fall down the memory hole. Watch for the spin that will surely follow. “Deranged Tea Partier/Anti-immigration maniac takes good earthy Discovery Channel hostage. Whitewash at eleven.”

  88. SidViscous says:

    At first I thought this was put up by someone capitalizing on the situation, but way too much content for something done in a dew hours.

    http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendId=137885742&blogId=205591823

    James Lee “am going over the Daniel Quinn books over and over. I refuse to read anything that is not directly related to the overpopulation problem and global warming. I am searching history for clues that could save the planet.”

    Also interesting when you look at his main profile under Children He puts “I don’t want any kids”

    Subtle.

  89. Tommy says:

    It seems to me that one who believes such things would come to hate his own existence and thereby go insane. Luckily, there is an outlet for people like that to vent their frustrations called “Whale Wars”. Instead of this self-defeating stunt, Lee could have joined the Sea Shepherds, tossed butyric acid at whaling vessels, been a hero for his sea friends, and reached the masses of cable viewers (well, those who watch Animal Planet).

  90. chris y says:

    Mr. Lee would have found lots of kindred spirits among the commenters at Dot Earth.

    What an amazing manifesto.

  91. Graeme says:

    Lucky the guy didn’t have access to a bio warfare agent that sterilises or kills people – “Children of Men”, “12 Monkeys” etc…

  92. Douglas DC says:

    Having known people and businesses that that have been harmed by eco-terrorists,
    and I also have police in my family, including a member of a special weapons team,two things: One, good shooting, saves the state money. Two, is he really any different than
    Hansen and his support of eliminating modern civilization?

  93. Jimash says:

    Aww GM just lost a potential friend.
    I haven’t given much time to this story and won’t, but the gist is “Discovery Channel wasn’t doing enough AGW advocacy ?”
    Ha.
    I laugh.

  94. Frederick Davies says:

    “…filthy human children…parasitic human infants…”
    Does anyone have any doubts anymore? Environmentalism is the evil of this century, the same way as Socialism was of the last.

  95. earthdog says:

    Sean says:
    September 1, 2010 at 1:58 pm

    Is he watching the same Discovery Channel programs I’m watching. I often have to change channels when warmist propaganda creeps into an otherwise interesting show. There is a real irony in all this but I also think the Green Party in Australia might have a job for him.

    This bothers me as well. I remember when there was only one “Discovery Channel” and it was filled with interesting shows about science and discoveries. Now it seems that if you are able to find a science related show on one of the multitude of “Discovery Channels”, it always gets preachy about global warming or the evils that men do to the environment.

    This is big media. They get the word out. If you say something enough times, people start to believe it. And then you have global warming, né “climate change” hysteria.

    This guy was a sad, unfortunate, and hopefully isolated case. But he is a glaring example of what can happen when the propaganda really takes hold.

  96. justin ert says:

    Climate rage.
    It was only a matter of time until the first case of “climate rage” was recorded. Predictably, the perp was an deranged, eco-terrorist.
    Is the fat lady inhaling for her song? What a year for the warmistas.

  97. Graeme says:

    Saving the environment and the remaning species diversity of the planet is now your mindset. Nothing is more important than saving them. The Lions, Tigers, Giraffes, Elephants, Froggies, Turtles, Apes, Raccoons, Beetles, Ants, Sharks, Bears, and, of course, the Squirrels.

    Blessed are the Squirrels???

    Unfortunately for every one that picks up guns and explosives and acts, there are another 100 who believe the same and just don’t have the will to act.

  98. Sean Peake says:

    @dbleader61, I posted a comment that Lee was from Burnaby BC, which is where his web site was registered at. My error, as it now seems that he was from Hawaii then San Diego.
    Regardless, this is serious stuff. The lunatic fringe is getting worked up and I think any high profile climate realist must be careful. While it is easy to make fun of this guy and his demise, there are likely many more like him, or worse, out there. Please be alert to your surroundings and take precautions.

  99. sandy jardine says:

    Classy stuff Watts. Now why would a sane skeptic want to be seen anywhere near you?

  100. wws says:

    The key thing to remember about “Think Progress” is that, in true Orwellian fashion, it is a place where you will find absolutely no evidence of anything remotely resembling what either of those words stands for.

  101. sandy jardine says:

    Graeme says:
    Unfortunately for every one that picks up guns and explosives and acts, there are another 100 who believe the same and just don’t have the will to act.
    = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
    What?

  102. P Walker says:

    Gail Combs – I was appalled at the comments , but it seems that is the collective thinking of the far left .

  103. Graeme says:

    Gnomish says:
    September 1, 2010 at 2:04 pm
    Tipping point!
    I was expecting it to be joe romm, but obviously joe’s not as devout as this guy.

    I suspect that “Smoking Joe” enjoys the benefits of his carbon footprint to much to make the sacrifice.

  104. Stephen Brown says:

    This is a very sad situation. The hostage taker is dead, as is the case in 9 out of 10 such cases. No-one else was hurt, for which everyone should give thanks.
    The man was mentally deranged; no credence should be paid to anything he is purported to have said or written.
    The dead man’s motivation for his actions cannot be ascribed to anything to do with reality. He was mentally unbalanced and could have chosen any topic to be the focus of his deluded anger.
    Just be happy that no-one else got hurt.

  105. KlausB says:

    Wasn’t it expected?
    When fear is sowed, agression comes as/at harvest.

    KlausB

  106. Graeme says:

    Jimbo says:
    September 1, 2010 at 2:21 pm
    —-
    You know there will be many environmentalists cheering him on until someone gets hurt. I hope we don’t get to that stage though.

    Unfortunately there will be those who will keep cheering and will valorise this guy as some sort of hero.

  107. rbateman says:

    From the ranting list of Lee, I suspect he didn’t really need a reason to go off, and probably would have found one eventually.
    People get into this hysterical-gotta do something to right the world-mode and the 1st thing that comes along they act.
    And others simply carry around a vendetta blaming the world for thier problems, and they set out to get even.

  108. Sandw15 says:

    Let’s play Name That James!

    Pick which James goes with this quote.

    “We’ve got to get these climate deniers out of the way.”

    a. Lee
    b. Cameron
    c. Hansen

  109. Katabasis says:

    I simply cannot believe this has just happened.

    Just what kind of a chilling effect is this likely to have?

  110. oakgeo says:

    The waste of a human life is dreadful, especially when it so obviously is due to a mental illness or defect. I feel for his family; they will question whether they did enough for him for the rest of their lives.

    This episode has nothing to do with environmentalism, alarmism or any other externalisms. It was an internal schism that destroyed this man. The external hook he hung it on is irrelevant.

  111. Gail Combs says:

    INGSOC says:
    September 1, 2010 at 3:22 pm

    What surprises me most, is that so far this is the only freak deranged enough to go postal. I have seen first hand just how enraged the eco-deists are becoming due to not having their way……
    __________________________________________________________
    The terrorism from the PETA and the Animal Liberation Front shows just how far “activist” can go in “fighting” for what they consider right.

    “…In the past, PETA has handled the press for the Animal Liberation Front (ALF), a violent, underground group of fanatics who plant firebombs in restaurants, destroy butcher shops, and torch research labs. The FBI considers ALF among America’s most active and prolific terrorist groups, but PETA compares it to the Underground Railroad and the French Resistance. More than 20 years after its inception, PETA continues to hire convicted ALF militants and funds their legal defense. In at least one case, court records show that Ingrid Newkirk herself was involved in an ALF arson.

    PETA has even begun to adopt the tactics of an ALF offshoot known as SHAC (Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty). This group is notorious for taking protests outside the boardroom and into the living room, attacking their targets at their homes….” http://activistcash.com/organization_overview.cfm/o/21-people-for-the-ethical-treatment-of-animals

    Unfortunately there is a good deal of overlap between PETA, AFL and those who believe in CAGW. Do not forget this is not the first episode of violence. “A woman in the US has been injured when a bomb disguised to look like a box of chocolates exploded in her face… reports have suggested the woman may have been targeted because she is married to an oil executive.” http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=7928778

    I hope this is the last violence we see over this issue.

  112. John Whitman says:

    eric anderson says:
    September 1, 2010 at 2:02 pm

    We can also credit Dr. James “coal trains of death” Hansen for this, can’t we?

    I don’t know what to term this philosophy. I guess I’d call it anti-humanist. We’re parasites. Polluting, life-sucking parasites. But we’ve got to save the squirrels! The planet does not need humans, but it needs squirrels(?). Definitely not a humanist. He’s a squirrelist.

    ——————-

    eric anderson ,

    Mr. Lee appeared to be, unfortunately, a mentally unbalanced person.

    You ask what philosophy would contain the kind of things he wrote/said and account for his actions?

    Google the philosophy of nihilism. It seems a good candidate.

    Does nihilism describe some very idealogical environmentalist positions toward mankind?

    John

  113. Lee’s manifesto is old stuff. The first one was published by the Club of Rome back in the 60s. Later it became the Earth Day in 1969, the U.N. Earth Charter and Agenda 21 in te 70s, and Katzinsky in the 80s went into hard action as the Unabomber.

    Crazy people believe that the only way to make people change their minds on how to live is by means of a pistol pressed into our skulls. Or with taxes, a somewhat less bloody way to reach the same end.

  114. INGSOC says:

    sandy jardine says:
    September 1, 2010 at 3:53 pm

    “Classy stuff Watts. Now why would a sane skeptic want to be seen anywhere near you?”

    I was also amazed that, so far, there were no idiot trolls looking to really make an ass of himself. I should have known better.

    Tell me “Sardine”, how long have you had these feelings of inferiority?

  115. Sandw15 says:

    More Name That James.

    “I want to call those deniers out into the street at high noon and shoot it out with those boneheads.”

    Which James?
    a. Lee
    b. Cameron
    c. Hansen

  116. Jimmy Haigh says:

    Just woken up and read about all this. Very scary. Especially given that they “…know where we live…”

  117. Graeme says:

    Frederick Davies says:
    September 1, 2010 at 3:43 pm
    “…filthy human children…parasitic human infants…”
    Does anyone have any doubts anymore? Environmentalism is the evil of this century, the same way as Socialism was of the last.

    Environmentalism? Socialism? – apart from the labels I didn’t know that there was a difference.

  118. peterhodges says:

    i am sure the first study linking this ‘climate rage’ to global warming is in the works.

  119. cynical bastard says:

    Canuck?
    Check.

    Of Asian origin?
    Check

    Environmentalist?
    Check.

    Off his rocker?
    Check.

    …David Suzuki…???

  120. Graeme says:

    I’m sorry, unless evidence turns up that this guy had been certified in the past, I’m not buying the idea that he was insane.

    This is a guy who has nutured an extreme human hating ideology for years, this final act of violence, and it’s outcome were natural outcomes of that ideology.

    An otherwise sane man with very destructive ideas, living in a very dark and bleak place that ultimately produced the outcome it did.

    Just be wary of labelling something as insane, it allows us to avoid digging deeper to understand the underlying problem, and we will never get to a solution unless we understand the problem.

    It’s very good to hear that no one else has been hurt.

  121. Sandw15 says:

    Name That James.

    “The trains carrying coal to power plants are death trains. Coal-fired power plants are factories of death.”

    Which James?
    a. Lee
    b. Cameron
    c. Hansen

  122. INGSOC says:

    oakgeo says:
    September 1, 2010 at 4:15 pm

    “This episode has nothing to do with environmentalism, alarmism or any other externalisms. It was an internal schism that destroyed this man. The external hook he hung it on is irrelevant.”

    Forgive me, and with all due respect, but this is as clear a case of the dangers of the kind of hysteria sent up by the big green movement as any I have seen. Passing this event off as “just another poor deranged soul” is tantamount to hiding your head in the sand. Labeling these sorts of terrorists as insane is dangerous, as it minimizes the real causality in favour of a soothing and more easily understood stereotype. This happens all the time in media, when the aim is to gloss things over and move on without addressing the factors leading to an horrific crime. The seeds have been planted by reckless individuals seeking power by any means. I fear this is a taste of what will be a common occurrence for some time.

  123. u.k.(us) says:

    What a sad state of affairs.
    Politics, lack of communication, propaganda, environmentalism run amok, greed, fear, lack of reasonable alternatives, implied time constraints, media sensationalism, instant gratification, spending beyond means; to name a few.
    IMO, the worst one, is instant gratification.
    So, I quote:
    “Nothing worthwhile comes easily. Work, continuous work and hard work, is the only way to accomplish results that last.”

    I know this to be true.

  124. D. King says:

    I hope his tortured soul is at peace.

  125. Sandw15 says:

    Name That James.

    “Find solutions for Global Warming, Automotive pollution, International Trade, factory pollution, and the whole blasted human economy.”

    Which James?
    a. Lee
    b. Cameron
    c. Hansen

  126. James Sexton says:

    sandy jardine says:
    September 1, 2010 at 3:53 pm

    Classy stuff Watts. Now why would a sane skeptic want to be seen anywhere near you?
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Why? Because he reported the news? What’s the problem with that? I count myself as sane and a skeptic. I’m here on Watts’ blog. Do you have a point to make?

  127. tokyoboy says:

    Lee has been influenced much by Paul Ehrlich?

  128. Graeme says:

    sandy jardine says:
    September 1, 2010 at 3:54 pm
    Graeme says:
    Unfortunately for every one that picks up guns and explosives and acts, there are another 100 who believe the same and just don’t have the will to act.
    = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
    What?

    Sandy – there are plenty of people who think the same as Lee. He is just the first to act in a very public way.

  129. Maxbert says:

    This individual had become deranged to the point of violence, but his elitist, Luddite misanthropy (he calls humans “they”) mirrors that of your garden-variety, environmental extremist. He shares with them that self-hating neurosis that leads to viewing babies as “parasitic” and “filth.”

  130. ZT says:

    This is just a sad, sad troubled/person/case – not really worthy of inclusion here (in my humble opinion). I’m sure that statisticians could demonstrate that the troubled-individual-occurrence-frequency is reasonably cause agnostic. (and I’m sure Michael E. Mann is hard at work proving this with his non-portable fortran77 code – right Tamino?).

    Mind you – I’m not going to resist pointing out (yet again) the people behind the optimum population trust seem to be particularly unenthusiastic about the human race – enthusiastic warm-mongers, though they are.

    http://www.optimumpopulation.org/opt.aboutus.html

    (They are very proactive about their sterilization program offsets).

  131. Jeff Id says:

    Sorry Doc,

    I was just making light of another unreasonable situation. Thank god nobody else got hurt.

  132. INGSOC says:

    Further to my previous comment;

    The fact that Lee did not hurt anyone speaks volumes. I’ll bet he was counting on being seen as somewhat of a hero by the very people that filled his head with these ideas. Namely the Discovery Channel. His actions will be very well understood by many, many more people than is comfortable to imagine. Try and sit through an episode of “Whale Wars”; it glorifies violent and destructive behavior in pursuit of an agenda. Rather than call him insane, I would say he was probably a simple and easily led sort of guy. Lots more where he came from.

  133. Dave F says:

    @ Alan Clark, 2:57 pm:

    The ‘culture of death’. Yes, I believe it to be so myself. It is strange how small events can make you see the bigger picture of things once in a while.

    Try this out, not even a few hours and he has cheerleaders:

    Go! Go! on Sep 1, 2:56 PM said:
    I agree with him, and he has some big B*lls to do this – but why target DHC and TLC?? They are only a very small part of the problem facing the world with in the next 50 years. Our biggest problem is greed and our leaders (mainly over the last two presidental terms) ignoring the problem for profit.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/james-lee#comment-4c7ea1ec7f8b9a5528070300#ixzz0yKEyAEIZ

    Disgusting.

  134. @sandy jardine: unfortunately, on this occasion, Anthony did more than just ‘report the news’. He inserted the word ‘warmist’ into a story about a dangerous lunatic. It’s too easy to cherry pick stories about the lunatic fringe of whatever you don’t like. I don’t think this is one of the most responsible posts I have seen on this site.

  135. Dave Worley says:

    It’s Bush’s fault.

  136. INGSOC says:

    Maxbert says:
    September 1, 2010 at 4:37 pm

    This individual had become deranged to the point of violence, but his elitist, Luddite misanthropy (he calls humans “they”) mirrors that of your garden-variety, environmental extremist. He shares with them that self-hating neurosis that leads to viewing babies as “parasitic” and “filth.”

    Well said. I would add that a great many more are becoming deranged to the point of violence. The odds don’t look good.

  137. Mike M. says:

    My hat is off to Sandw15. Brilliant. Hope someone from Beck’s show sees that.

  138. Smokey says:

    Rod McLaughlin,

    Cherry picking doesn’t apply here. This is news. And the evidence indicates the guy was an eco-wacko. Sorry, but it is what it is.

  139. evanmjones says:

    Experienced an “awakening”?

    That would be the first time anyone watched Al Gore’s movie and didn’t experience an asleepening.

  140. Justa Joe says:

    It seems like people are under the impression that this guy is the 1st leftist eco-terrorist inspired by Algore. Is everyone forgetting the Unabomber?

  141. Dave F says:

    @ evanmjones, 5:31 pm:

    lmbo, that should be classicalized.

  142. evanmjones says:

    Dave F.: Thanks. But it was only a matter of time until somebody beat me to it.

    Let me guess. The headlines tomorrow will read something like Anti-Immigrant Terrorist Takes Hostages.

    Let me guess. He is a W.C. Fields fan.

  143. wayne says:

    False environmentalist propaganda, this is what it will reap. Only because he was a man, as for any other human being, do I feel sorry for what they made of him with their words, Gore, Ehrlich, and IPCC alarmist hawks at the top of the list. Just hope he was not a member of some group.

  144. Henry chance says:

    Napolitano says white guys, vets, bibles and guns.
    Does The Rev alGore green bible count?

  145. Sandw15 says:

    Thanks Mike M, but I admit that I borrowed the idea from the old “Al Gore or the Unibomber” thing that made the talk show circuit a few years ago.

    Key: b,b,c,a

  146. Henry chance says:

    We have a handle.

    Ecobomber

  147. Dave L says:

    I wonder if this nut belonged to Greenpeace. The latter is the environmental wacko organization that actively promotes civil disobedience, such as the current harassment of Cairn Energy near Greenland.

  148. evanmjones says:

    In the uneven struggle between humanity and the Lions, Tigers, Giraffes, Elephants, Froggies, Turtles, Apes, Raccoons, Beetles, Ants, Sharks, Bears, and, of course, the Squirrels, humanity needs all the help it can get.

    YET you encourage the exact opposite instead of discouraging human growth and procreation. Surely you MUST ALREADY KNOW this!

    I want Discovery Communications to broadcast on their channels to the world their new program lineup and I want proof they are doing so.

    “You and me baby ain’t nothin’ but a couple of mammals
    Let’s do like they do on the Discovery Channel”

  149. dkkraft says:

    Just saw it. CNN (Rick Sanchez) is basically calling him an eco-wacko. “Will kill people to save animals, making babies is evil, etc” …. in other words ticking a bunch of the boxes that describe “eco-wackjob”. He’s not pulling punches. A bit of a surprise from CNN really.

    This is horrible and ugly in the extreme.

    That said, condolences to the Lee’s family and sympathy for the people who had to go through this and to their families.

  150. Henry chance says:

    Does hate speech from Joe Romm and James Hansen cause this hatred?

    In the course of not jumping to conclusions, he needs his blood tested for Koolaid Overdose. The bullet may have entered after he was gone.

  151. Chris R. says:

    Terrible tragedy.

    You knew this had to happen eventually. Nevertheless, it’s very sad.

    And to “Rod McLauglin”–Vis-a-vis your criticism of Anthony Watts for “inserting the word ‘warmist’ “–Did you perhaps note that this gentleman experienced his awakening AFTER WATCHING An Inconvenient Truth?

  152. evanmjones says:

    And I do hope that this self-serving gloating that some users decided to apply here is kept to a minimum.

    You’re asking a lot.

  153. kadaka (KD Knoebel) says:

    One of the plastic card companies, think it was American Express, was recently running an ad campaign where people would send in their “feel good” ideas that might get funding. One featured a guy who mentioned an old dam they (who?) were trying to get rid of. He said how good it feels to take out a dam.

    Beavers do it, it’s cute. Man does it, it’s a crime against nature. And here I thought with wanting renewable hydroelectric energy, with needing to increase water reserves due to expected AGW-induced droughts, and flood prevention initiatives to preserve life and property, we needed more dams.

    If we’ve learned one thing from the terrorists, it’s how easy explosives can be made from common ingredients with minimal knowledge. Why not help the planet by taking out a dam? It’s not like anyone’s going to get hurt, it’s just stone and concrete getting blown up. Of course if you don’t want to risk getting blown up yourself, it only takes some brief work with a large pry bar at some out-of-sight railroad tracks to take care of one of Hansen’s “death trains” of coal. No higher cause than saving the planet, might as well do it. BTW, don’t worry about any crew on that train. They’re enablers, no better than guards at a concentration camp. They chose to be there, they accepted the risk. Get some friends to help out, repeat it often enough, get these money-grubbing Earth-destroying industrialists to reconsider what they’re doing by hitting them in the wallet, the only place they’ll notice.

    I read some time ago there’s a “hidden” internet. You have to know the sites are there, they can be an otherwise-unknown part of a legitimate domain, numbered addresses, etc. You could plan some interesting things from your computer at home or work, and no one would know about it.

  154. Chris F says:

    The projection going on in the comments at ThinkProgress is just astounding! I’m flabbergasted at these people!
    Say hey old man / how can you stand to think that way…Steve Winwood

  155. Alan Clark says:

    Maybe Gore’s movie wasn’t wrong about AGW killing people afterall. I believe I’m having an awakening too. Perhaps now I understand what is coming.

  156. James Sexton says:

    Rod McLaughlin says:
    September 1, 2010 at 4:59 pm

    @sandy jardine: unfortunately, on this occasion, Anthony did more than just ‘report the news’. He inserted the word ‘warmist’ into a story about a dangerous lunatic. It’s too easy to cherry pick stories about the lunatic fringe of whatever you don’t like. I don’t think this is one of the most responsible posts I have seen on this site.
    ========================================================

    Get a grip and read his manifesto. Much of it is part and parcel of the warmista vernacular. The thing is, rational people don’t act in the manner Lee did. However, this world isn’t made exclusively of rational people. Irrational people will grab onto hyperbole and act. As Sandw15 has pointed out, there are several statements on the alarmist side that equate CO2 emitters to the lowest form not even worthy of human designation. Did they think the irrational people of this earth would never act on their portrayals? Or do they absolve themselves with allusion their words will be never acted upon?

  157. Tom in Texas says:

    After reading his manifesto, I’m surprised he didn’t target a hospital maternity ward.

  158. Warren says:

    I made the mistake of clicking the link to ThunkRegress. My eyes!!!!! I need to wash them with bleach. I’d forgotten those people were out there in blog land. And even worse, they are allowed to walk the streets as well.

    That blog isn’t taken seriously is it? really?

  159. R. Shearer says:

    So sad. Mr. Lee forget ancient Chinese saying, “We all die before Earth die.”

  160. Dave F says:

    http://thinkprogress.org/2010/02/18/scott-brown-terrorism-yawn/

    “Today a man flew a plane into a Texas federal building in an apparent domestic terrorist attack. The suicide bomber, identified as Joseph Andrew Stack, was allegedly a right wing extremist who wrote on a website that violence “is the only answer” and expressed anger at the IRS, the federal government, and health care reform.”

    Yeah, Romm has a leg to stand on. Sure.

  161. Henry chance says:

    If you read his note, he is repeating what the green extreme sites publish.

    It seems Joe Roomm can’t find words strong enough with enough drama.

    On Tamino, they are just talking about this thread and not at all about the ecobomber.

  162. Jason Bourne says:

    This man was obviously a schizophrenic, not a “warmista”. Shame on you Anthony for exploiting his death, you are a sad man.

  163. dkkraft says:

    Wow, thanks for the heads up to the Romm blog. I know that blogs can be a bit of a moshpit, but that is over the top.

    The Rage !

    Wouldn’t take much to push some of the commenters over there into Lee territory. I hope none of them get cut off in traffic or maybe get a mistake with their fast food order…..

  164. Duckster says:

    @James Sexton

    As Sandw15 has pointed out, there are several statements on the alarmist side that equate CO2 emitters to the lowest form not even worthy of human designation. Did they think the irrational people of this earth would never act on their portrayals?

    And you don’t think that the rhetoric from both ends of the political spectrum is capable of fueling the kind of paranoia exhibited here? What about the “environmentalism is a plot to force socialism/world government on an unsuspecting population” argument. Or how about this one from above “This [environmental] movement has an underbelly that draws inspiration from the Khmer Rouge.”

    It sounds pretty alarmist to me.

    And none of the rest of you call anyone to account on these kinds of extremist statements.

  165. Dave F says:

    Also, if I remember correctly, what Romm is referencing as hypocrisy in his Climate Progress post was someone showing up at Anthony’s house or office. That is just crazy. Where are all the people hijacking tv stations to stop the spread of ‘AGW propoganda’ and so forth?

  166. JDN says:

    As I was saying a few days ago…

    Animus homo inimicus delenda est.
    Misanthropy is to be wiped out.

  167. Daniel H says:

    Just another inconvenient reminder that irrational dogma breeds fanaticism. First the Unabomber, now this… what next? MSNBC has found a youtube video of a TV show that James Lee allegedly pitched to The Discovery Channel. Please note the calving iceberg that features prominently in the program at about the 40 second mark:

  168. Pamela Gray says:

    Mental illness. When people have this, we cringe, stay silent, or roll out unending pithy blame comments. When someone says, “I have cancer”, get-well cards come rolling out. Folks, I am sorry, but I can’t go along with most of the comments here.

    My heart goes out to the family of this man. I would send a get-well card to them, but alas, there is no cure yet for such mental torment as I see written in his manifesto. Unless you have a close family member with mental illness, you have no idea. Just no idea.

    This thread has brought up all kinds of feelings and bad memories and I will not comment again. I wish the thread had never seen the light of day. It speaks of making hay out of devastation and I am deeply disappointed that it appeared here.

  169. CodeTech says:

    Well… some of us have been saying “you first” for a while now. Apparently the truly deranged are listening. Unfortunately, they’re going to try to take others with them, which can not be allowed. I propose we set up “extermination booths”, as shown in the original Star Trek, for people to voluntarily walk into when the urge hits them.

    Although “heartless” is the absolute LAST word anyone can use to describe me, I also have zero tolerance for stupid. People who immerse themselves into a fantasy world of AGW, Peak Oil, and a few other ridiculous conspiracy theories to the point they feel they have to “take action” get zero respect from me. Neither do those who goad them, feed them, and DEFEND THEM IN COURT (yes, you, Hansen).

  170. Frank K. says:

    This is a very sad event, but alas as we sow so shall we reap. Think of all the alarmist global warming and extremist-green propaganda being pumped into our kids today. Even now, I bet some science teacher is showing his class “An Inconvenient Truth”. This, along with all the alarmist messages in the media on how we urgently need to “do something” to stop global warming (or harming the earth in some other unlikely way). With kids growing up with this junk science all around them, it’s inevitable that some not-so-sane types decide to take matters into their own hands.

    Unfortunately the CAGW types and eco-extremists will never moderate their message – too much money in the climate business to turn back now…

  171. Michael Larkin says:

    Come on, folks. I’m no fan of warmistas, but this unfortunate man was most probably just mentally ill and if it hadn’t have been one thing, it would likely have been another that prompted him to go postal.

  172. mikelorrey says:

    LOL was just over at the Rommanista site, he’s claiming that the gunman is only a “purported” ecoterrorist. Some of his commenters are claiming this guy is a conservative anti-immigration terrorist.

  173. James Sexton says:

    Duckster says:
    September 1, 2010 at 6:43 pm

    @James Sexton

    ….
    And you don’t think that the rhetoric from both ends of the political spectrum is capable of fueling the kind of paranoia exhibited here? What about the “environmentalism is a plot to force socialism/world government on an unsuspecting population” argument. Or how about this one from above “This [environmental] movement has an underbelly that draws inspiration from the Khmer Rouge.”
    ========================================================

    Oddly, I don’t find the parallels. Sir, we’ve been dealing with communists/socialists since the first person realized he could rationalize himself into equal value with people that contribute.(never bothering to understand it kills initiative of the people that do) The response from the skeptics hasn’t been to round them up and kill the alarmists. Conversely, the Khmer Rouge, was and is, indeed a communist movement that engaged in such actions. The worst free market capitalists did was hold Senate hearings. I’m terribly sorry if you take offense to the actions of Stalin, Mao, and the ilk, but they were indeed communists and socialists. You see, the difference of the death trains of the Soviet Union, National Socialist Germany, and the Khmer Rouge versus the death trains of Jim Hansen’s coal is a thing called REALITY.

    Lunatics won’t understand the difference like you and I do. Do I sometimes wish the rhetoric would ease up? Sure. Do I, for one second, believe we should not always remind people of the realities of communist/socialism. Never. If we are delivered unto them, this fate will assuredly be delivered unto us. History has taught us this lesson over and over again.

    Duckster, I may be unique here and may not be representative of many people here. But this is the sole reason of why I engage here. I don’t care if the earth is warming or not. I don’t care if the arctic melts or not. I don’t care about the thermodynamics of our atmosphere. I care about self-determination(as individuals and collectively). I care about choice. I believe mankind should be allowed to achieve to the heights of his greatest ambitions and not be defined by the least common denominator. I believe mankind’s freedom, both physically, intellectually and spiritually is mankind’s salvation, not his destruction. I believe mankind’s destruction comes from the inhibition of his achievement. I believe mankind should not be defined by what he was forced not to do, but rather, by what heights he did ascend to.

    I find my listed beliefs in direct conflict with the AGW movement.

  174. peterhodges says:

    well i took a look around at RC and thinkprogress…unlike WUWT or even MSM they do not post Lee’s actual words.

    and FWIW joe romm truly is a hypocrite

  175. Smokey says:

    There are wackjobs everywhere, and making this guy the poster boy of the true believers in CAGW is unfair. Sure, he was a climate alarmist. But being a wackjob trumps that.

    But the purveyors of the CAGW conjecture still have not produced any empirical observations or evidence showing that the portion of human-emitted CO2 [less than 3% of the total] causes any measurable effect on global temperatures.

  176. Lefties blame what Timothy McVeigh did 15 years ago on current Republicans, but won’t take the blame for something they enabled this afternoon.

  177. James Sexton says:

    Smokey says:
    September 1, 2010 at 7:53 pm

    There are wackjobs everywhere, and making this guy the poster boy of the true believers in CAGW is unfair. Sure, he was a climate alarmist. But being a wackjob trumps that.
    ========================================================

    True.

  178. CPT. Charles says:

    Al Gore (and the Greens) preyed on his fears.

    First the Unabomber, Dr. Theodore John “Ted” Kaczynski.

    Now the Discovery Shooter, James Lee.

    Once is an accident, twice is a coincidence, three times is enemy action.

    No more ‘free passes’ for the ‘we must save the planet at all costs’ BS coming from the Greenies.

    Quit whining about how UNFAIR we’re being as we connect the dots.

    You OWN it.

  179. Gnomish says:

    http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/nl102255r

    Evil ideology requires evil means and produces evil results.
    Prima facie, ipso facto and Q.E.D. Stupidity in the mirror is way closer than it should be.
    seriousLee.

    Reply: Not quite understanding how this comment holds together with the link, but it sort of is on topic. ~ ctm

  180. Dave F says:

    @ Pamela:

    Sorry to hear that. I have had close family with mental illness also. It is not easy to deal with. I would say that Lee’s actions were the result of mental illness. The guy was arrested in 2008 and has been homeless since then. I am pretty sure after reading his manifesto that he was mentally ill. I am with you on feeling truly sad about his death and I can only hope it doesn’t stigmatize his family that he died in this way. My Grandpappy raised me Irish Catholic and taught that we pray for all the souls, the good, and especially the bad.

    Then again, when he was arrested in 2008, he was evaluated by doctors, who found nothing wrong.

    The Gazette also reported that Lee had spent two weeks in jail following his arrest, including several days being evaluated by psychiatrists.

    “I told them my idea of saving the planet,” he said. “They couldn’t find anything wrong with me.”

    So the mental illness idea may not even be correct. Some people are just malicious. Time will tell.

    Also, and as I have said previously, it is sad that some of the rhetoric from environmentalists make it easier to miss the line between the two. I have some friends who have said many of these things, with all earnestness, and truly believe that population control is the wave of the future. That, I think, is scary. People are convinced that we must regulate populations to preserve humanity’s place in the future of this planet. But how do people decide which populations to regulate? It always comes down to the same lines drawn in between populations; Muslims, blacks, Jews, whites, Assyrians, et cetera. Who decides which population?

  181. Gnomish says:

    Well, that was the wrong link! This is what I meant to put, sorry:
    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=c0b_1283301710

  182. FergalR says:

    Lots of people seem so sure that Mr. Lee was mentally ill. Criminals use guns and bombs too you know.

    Paul R. Ehrlich and John Holdren spout similar hateful Malthusian ideas. James Hansen has called for civil disobedience – otherwise known as criminality – in support of CAGW. Why any of you suspect he was detached from reality is beyond me.

    My sympathies for those who knew him and I hope he finds compassion wherever he is now.

  183. Dave F says:

    Oops, forgot the link to the story I quoted from:

    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/09/01/james-jay-lee/

    Sorry.

  184. _Jim says:

    stevengoddard September 1, 2010 at 8:01 pm

    Lefties blame what Timothy McVeigh did 15 years ago on current Republicans, but won’t take the blame for something they enabled this afternoon.

    “Mark from Michigan” – he listened to Mark from Michigan on SW (contrary to Clinton blaming someone named ‘Rush’ – and that would then make it the ‘current Conservatives’) –

    See “Mark Koernke” – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Koernke

    Interested parties who wish to come to know the mind of McVeigh might check out the book American Terrorist written by Buffalo, New York journalists Lou Michel and Dan Herbeck who had access to McVeigh for 75 hours worth of interviews for this book (besides interviews with others as well).

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Terrorist

    Excerpt from the book where McVeigh takes credit, claims no c o n s p i r a c y –

    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/842182/posts?page=33#33

    .

  185. David Davidovics says:

    I worry about an entire generation that grew up in the shadow if Al Gore’s film and the crazies that promote and distribute his ideals. I hope this isn’t a sign of things to come.

  186. kadaka (KD Knoebel) says:

    Jason Bourne said on September 1, 2010 at 6:38 pm:

    This man was obviously a schizophrenic, not a “warmista”. Shame on you Anthony for exploiting his death, you are a sad man.

    Speaking of schizophrenics, what’s your Identity?

    With regards to scientific discussions, are you upset about this site’s Supremacy?

    Remember you’re a guest here, don’t issue an Ultimatum.

    Exploiting death? What do you think Anthony does, make sensational movies? He doesn’t, which you may find to be An Inconvenient Truth.

  187. April E. Coggins says:

    Sad. I do blame the lefty alarmists and the media to some degree. The poor pathetic soul probably did believe that he was saving the world. Words matter. Outlandish, irresponsible claims that humans are causing the earth to warm to the point of destroying the earth must have driven this man to do everything in his power to save it.

  188. dkkraft says:

    Jason Bourne says:
    September 1, 2010 at 6:38 pm
    This man was obviously a schizophrenic, not a “warmista”. Shame on you Anthony for exploiting his death, you are a sad man.

    There is no proof of schizophrenia in that manifesto – no claim to be hearing voices or evidence of hallucinations. He didn’t claim the animals were talking to him for heavens sake. There are other symptoms of course, but you cannot conclude schizophrenia from the evidence at hand.
    http://www.schizophrenia.ca/What_Is_Schizophrenia.pdf
    Look, every time someone does something appalling it’s not necessarily because they are “insane”. That is a cop-out.

    Clearly the guy had some kind of complex manifesting itself in misanthropy with an emphasis on infants. Amoung other things I am guessing that he didn’t get a lot of dates.

    We all have complexes. The quote “These are the demands and sayings of Lee” does hint at inflation of a complex.
    http://www.awakeninthedream.com/GlossaryOfTerms.html

    So the short answer is we don’t if he was schizophrenic or not or if he was insane or not.

    What we do know is that he cannot be allowed to do what he did – the police did their job. We also know that he was promoting common, if on the extreme end, green propaganda. We also know that this was news.

    Finally, we know that the way media report this is also news.

    Peace – condolences to all families effected

  189. _Jim says:

    Daniel H September 1, 2010 at 6:52 pm

    Just another inconvenient reminder that irrational dogma breeds fanaticism. First the Unabomber, now this… what next? MSNBC has found a youtube video of …

    “Race to Save The Planet” published by savetheplanetprotest

    Note: On ratings Dislikes to Likes ratio is over 2:1 (Dislikes 29 Likes 12) … not everybody is ‘buying it’ …

    .

  190. Duckster says:

    @James Sexton

    I believe mankind’s freedom, both physically, intellectually and spiritually is mankind’s salvation, not his destruction. I believe mankind’s destruction comes from the inhibition of his achievement.

    I actually believe many of these things too. But your freedom as defined here allows an individual to act without consequence: freedom from inhibition to murder, for example. You need to add one caveat (and this caveat provides a logical – rather than religious – basis for morality). I would rephrase it thusly:

    “Everyone has a right to physical, intellectual and spiritual freedoms, and the right to act in whatever ways allow them to maximize well-being, provided that these actions do not interfere with the rights of others to do the same (including future generations).”

    And once you have this, you have a basis for a social discussion on governance, government, environmentalism, war, welfare, punishment and all kinds of other things. And I support the discussion – it’s what is necessary to provide balance.

    There is a responsibility that comes with freedom, and that responsibility is to leave the world and our society and our government debt in as good a condition as we found it, so that others may enjoy the freedoms and rights that we have expressed.

    Sir, we’ve been dealing with communists/socialists since the first person realized he could rationalize himself into equal value with people that contribute.(never bothering to understand it kills initiative of the people that do)

    I understand and agree that big state welfare programs destroy initiative and undermine the work ethic. I want to see market based solutions to the problems of climate change, because I think that they will be more creative and efficient, and cost-effective. I don’t want to see global government, or big state solutions. I do think we might need to kick start the process a little, which is why I favor a flat carbon tax which is 100% redistributed back to tax payers through tax credits. With this, there should be minimal drag on the economy, as punters begin to choose energy based on their wallets, and new markets should open up as companies begin to provide new, more energy efficient products and services. I think a lot of environmentalists would also agree with this. This is not socialism.

    So you’ll forgive me if I get a little upset when I hear comments such as:

    Environmentalism? Socialism? – apart from the labels I didn’t know that there was a difference.

    It’s so much easier to knock down environmentalism when you have constructed a strawman argument such as this. It would be like me using Pat Robertson or Glen Beck to define everything that the right did in the US.

    Do I sometimes wish the rhetoric would ease up? Sure. Do I, for one second, believe we should not always remind people of the realities of communist/socialism.

    You do yourselves a disservice by not challenging extremist rhetoric (on either side) on this site. I am not saying it should be suppressed (it shouldn’t be), but just because it is on “your side” doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be called out.

  191. Scary!
    I hope that they closely scrutinize religious fundamentalists at airports. Not only Middle Eastern religious fanatics but also those that belong to the Malthusian Global Warming faith.

    We know specifically, that the leaders of this particular religious sect are frequent fliers while often occuping high positions in our society. They often attend conferences at exotic locations where this gang of individuals on a regular basis make shadowy deals in an effort to rip off money and wealth from ordinary people.

  192. Richard says:

    I’ve been wondering what the eco left was running all those AFTER HUMANS shows for.. now we know.. first what they want is nutso.. then they spin it for a few years.. “old Lee saw this coming”.. then they will be teaching it to our children in school..” you don’t want to have pollution babies do you?”

    squirrels of the world unite!

  193. AEGeneral says:

    INGSOC says:
    September 1, 2010 at 3:22 pm

    Most truly believed that their time had come with the election of Obama. The feeling of having to act up now to save the planet is growing… As is the case with this sort of thing, copy-cats will likely follow. As the fellow appears to be dead, they now have a “martyr” for the cause. As I have said before; we are entering a very dark age.

    Couldn’t have said it better myself.

    I’ve always feared the stage when this would start getting violent. It’s happened countless times throughout history. Someone adopts a radical point of view, tries to convince others by debating, but it doesn’t work. He’s labeled a fool. People start to avoid him when he approaches them in casual conversation. Then once he realizes he doesn’t have an intellectual leg to stand on, he decides to resort to violence to get the point across. He makes himself a martyr for the cause. We all know where it goes from there.

    Lee was not mentally ill, though. That’s just a cop-out. He knew what he was doing.

  194. James Sexton says:

    kadaka (KD Knoebel) says:
    September 1, 2010 at 8:25 pm

    Jason Bourne said on September 1, 2010 at 6:38 pm:

    This man was obviously a schizophrenic, not a “warmista”. Shame on you Anthony for exploiting his death, you are a sad man.
    ========================================================

    Yeh, the idiot comes in after the fact. Anthony posted this story well before the man’s demise.

    What’s sad is people like him not only believing they know all facets of science to where he understands climate, now they’re in the diagnosing mental illness business. What limited knowledge I have in the fields of psychology/psychiatry, and the very limited knowledge I have of this person, I’d say schizophrenia wasn’t his difficulty. The very act of taking hostages, while not unheard of, would be quite remarkable for a schizophrenic. To do so you must take people unawares or plan and execute precisely the plan. Schizophrenia isn’t the only mental illness, nor the most common. And we don’t know this man had any.

  195. Dave F says:

    I still don’t understand the huff and puff about the post. It is pretty clear that the guy had issues, but he strapped explosives to his chest, armed himself, and walked into a building he had been harassing for years to take hostages. He, in the course of harassing this company, was evaluated by state doctors and they found him fit enough to release back into society.

    “A desperate act to validate his own ego and opinion,” is how Lee’s brother-in-law, Thomas Leonard, described the attack in an interview with Fox News’ Neil Cavuto as the hostage standoff was unfolding.”

    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/09/01/james-jay-lee/

    So, I can’t trump the state doctor or his brother-in-law’s opinion. I don’t know him well enough to say he was crazy. His writing is disjointed, but he may just be a bad writer.

  196. JimF says:

    Woahhh!

    I just went to:

    http://thinkprogress.org/2010/09/01/discovery-terrorist-immigration/

    to read the blog and the comments. These people (the ones who haven’t been “voted down”) are truly scary. Arrogant, vicious, violent, hateful, ignorant, stupid — words fail. Is this the face of the leftist, warmist, environmentalist today, or just an aberrant thread of subhuman troglodytic development given wings by the internets?

    On the matter of the day, I’m so glad none of the innocents were harmed. As a Christian, I’m saddened by this poor man’s actions and resulting fate.

  197. Doubting Thomas says:

    Compared to Huffpo “Think Progress” is pretty tame.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/01/james-lee-discovery-chann_n_702356.html

    Read the comments there if you want to be truly scared. There appears to be dozens of folks that think he didn’t go far enough or that he was being most rational. Really creepy.

  198. Tim says:

    How would the media portray it if a skeptic took hostages and demanded a serious scientific debate? This poor chap was conned and went over the deep end trying to help. Sad but watch how they portray him. My money is that the media will simply cover it as a hostage taking, ignore his motives and move on to the next celebrity story because they don’t want the CAGW crowd to look dangerous and threatening.

    Now if it was a patriot movement person or a AGW skeptic they would print how dangerous they all are and demand all guns be taken.

    Truly sad that people don’t realize they are being manipulated.

  199. hunter says:

    The guy was obsessed with ‘filth’ the same way Brigadier General Jack Ripper was obsessed with ‘Precious Bodily Fluids’ in “Dr. Strangelove”
    http://www.imdb.com/character/ch0158904/
    That he went nuts and used eco-gibberish is a result of his disease, not eco-gibberish.
    He also used immigration and human extinction imagery in his magnum opus. He was likely obsessed with cleanliness, and no, I am not pretending to be a profiler or a shrink. Just an observer.
    However, the reaction by the enviro-extremists is interesting. Just like when Oswald murdered JFK, many on the left seem unable to imagine that a deranged person from their general side could act violently. From the bitterness of the reaction today, this guy must have struck some strange nerve in the shakier true believers.

  200. James Sexton says:

    JimF says:
    September 1, 2010 at 9:08 pm

    Woahhh!
    =========================================================
    Yeh, fun group there. 2 exerts from his manifesto and they label they guy as a conservative. Fortunately, anyone with the IQ over 60 already knows better. Don’t get worked up over it, its just an auto-defense mechanism kicking in for the people that would be first to the death camps were it not for people like us. They just don’t know where to aim their indignation. You can try to educate them if you want, but they don’t understand concepts much beyond 2 anyway, so there’s hardly a point.

  201. Douglas Dc says:

    I have feared this a start too. Death threats, actions, and terror. I too, see copy cats,
    if not supporters. He may be or not be a lone wolf…
    His computer will tell the tale.
    He may have been mentally ill, but so was Hitler…

  202. Suzanne says:

    “There is nothing wrong with the planet, the planet is fine… it’s the people who are ___!

  203. Cassandra King says:

    The result of years of cynical fear mongering, alarmist propaganda, emotional blackmail and rabble rousing snake oil salesmen with an agenda has taken its toll on young minds. I wonder if the AGW industry knew what it was doing when they started to pervert the minds of the young with their cynical political manipulation and brain washing techniques?
    Fear and loathing of humanity mixed with a fear of the future, mindless obedience to a political creed and a stunning ignorance of real science and its workings will the legacy of the AGW industry and we will all be paying the heavy price for years to come, the hundreds of billions of dollars wasted is only a part of the tragedy, the waste of a whole generation of cult inductees and graduates is the greatest sin of all.
    Even when the AGW cult dies it will leave a terrible legacy behind for years in the minds of the young and that is the real tragedy.

  204. E.A. says:

    James Sexton says:
    I’d say schizophrenia wasn’t his difficulty. The very act of taking hostages, while not unheard of, would be quite remarkable for a schizophrenic.
    ——————-

    You should stick to other areas, as you obviously don’t have a clue as to your biased inferences. In fact, paranoid schizophrenics taking hostages is so *NOT* uncommon, it’s a chapter in hostage negotiation textbooks, e.g.:
    http://www.crcnetbase.com/doi/abs/10.1201/9781420037326.ch11

    In any case, his rambling statement is very typical of some sort of mental illness. This whole thread is despicable.

  205. James Sexton says:

    hunter says:
    September 1, 2010 at 9:22 pm

    “He also used immigration and human extinction imagery in his magnum opus.

    However, the reaction by the enviro-extremists is interesting. Just like when Oswald murdered JFK, many on the left seem unable to imagine that a deranged person from their general side could act violently. From the bitterness of the reaction today, this guy must have struck some strange nerve in the shakier true believers.”
    ========================================================
    The strange nerve is as you stated, “human extinction imagery”. It’s still a bit of a closet discussion, but some are openly Malthusian. Which, if their arguments were to be true, Malthusian solutions would be correct. Recall, in Lee’s manifesto, he openly invoked Malthus. Yes it struck a nerve. Not only did he paint himself with them, he exposed them for what they are…….Malthusian. And it exposed me for what I really am………… a ufirstian!

  206. JimF says:

    Duckster says:
    September 1, 2010 at 8:34 pm

    “Everyone has a right to physical, intellectual and spiritual freedoms, and the right to act in whatever ways allow them to maximize well-being, provided that these actions do not interfere with the rights of others to do the same (including future generations).”

    So, how do we measure the rights of future generations? If, for example, Henry Ford had a prophetic dream and saw the carnage of 40,000 deaths per year on the highway because of his development of an affordable car, would he have built it? Or, could he have possibly had a prophetic dream in which millions and millions of people might have thanked him everyday because he gave them such liberty, such ease? I, for one, who have escaped death a couple times in auto accidents, praise and thank him for going forward.

    In the past environmentalists were on the side of science. They fought the US Corps of Engineers and others because they knew that those people had no idea about the unintended consequences (Adam Smith’s “invisible hand”) of their actions (channelizing streams; dam building; spraying DDT everywhere, etc.). Today’s environmentalists care less about science (it’s settled; no debate needed – notwithstanding serious and credible disputations).

    The idea that environmentalism has become a religion is underpinned by the dogmatism that permeates their discussions, denials and excuses. Some appeal to stopping the world in order to “do the best by future generations” {If you really want to do that, then start by reading in its entirety “The Wealth of Nations” and go from there}. Others have decided that Gaia is “holy” and we are vermin that should be exterminated. These are different flavors of cultists. Of course, the latter are supported by popular media, as in Mr. Smith’s view of humans as viruses in “The Matrix” and Cameron’s portrayal of – guess what? – humans in “Avatar”.

    As a geologist, I appreciate that the Earth has a “life” – a continuing set of changes stemming from things like asteroid impacts, heat transfer, radioactive decay, density changes, the phenomenon of water and its phase changes, and so on and on. But there’s nothing there to appreciate these things – just God and we humans who live here. We are what we’ve been waiting for over the many millenia, and we’ve progressed far from inception. Let’s keep progressing.

  207. Dr. Dave says:

    Look…I’m NOT a psychiatrist…but trust me, this guy was NUTS! One of the first symptoms of schizophrenia is delusional thought, not necessarily auditory hallucinations. I’m not denying that constant AGW propaganda didn’t feed into it, but let’s face it, there HAD to be some underlying psychological pathology. This guy had been nuts for years. He was a crazy looking for a cause.

    I won’t deny that apocalyptic predictions of doom and gloom are just the kind of fodder that feeds these whack jobs (or they simply make it out of whole cloth), but you really need a truly “disturbed” individual to actually act on this stuff.

    As they say say in Texas, “this feller just wasn’t ‘right’.”

  208. Duckster says:

    So, how do we measure the rights of future generations?

    This is why we have politics – it needs to be a discussion, and one without any final conclusion. It’s only this way that we find any kind of balance between societies needs, wants and goals, and the resources they have to reach them.

    Today’s environmentalists care less about science (it’s settled; no debate needed – notwithstanding serious and credible disputations).

    I can’t speak for all environmentalists – and there certainly are nutters and luddites out there – but most people I know who describe themselves as environmentalists are neither militant nor unwilling to discuss and negotiate. Making this current argument (environmentalism = socialism = world government) a straw man.

    These are different flavors of cultists.

    And again, it would be equally disingenuous of me to define an entire movement by its most extreme adherents – there are plenty of sane people in the tea party, but it would be very easy to deride them based on those who are waaaaaaaay out there.

  209. Dave F says:

    @ E.A.:

    …his rambling statement is very typical of some sort of mental illness…

    You know, as much as I like generalizations from someone with unknown credentials that actually take undefined symptoms and do not diagnose them, I’ll wait til the media talks to the doctors he saw in 2008 that “couldn’t find anything wrong with him.” I wonder what they have to say. I wonder if there are results sitting around in a file in the county he was arrested?

    To the other point, you know what is even more despicable than this thread? The people who come here to post that believe that Joseph Stack was a right-wing nut job. Which was most of the US media at the time. There were all the reports about the Tea Party and tax resistance. Now we’ve got crickets chirping indignation here when the same inference is drawn, but the other direction.

    I think they were both crazy, which makes me crazy to a lot of people I guess. That is how I know I am normal.

  210. enelcuno delatuya says:

    He who troubles his own house will inherit the wind,
    And the fool will be servant to the wise of heart.
    Proverbs 11;29, New King James Version

  211. Keith Kloor says:

    Many of you (but not all I stress), including Anthony, are swimming in some slimy waters on this one. Here’s my take:
    http://www.collide-a-scape.com/2010/09/02/demagogue-meet-demagogue/

  212. JimF says:

    @Duckster says:
    September 1, 2010 at 10:12 pm

    “…there are plenty of sane people in the tea party, but it would be very easy to deride them based on those who are waaaaaaaay out there….”

    Are you sure you’re Duckster? You sound awfully like PaulW. May I see your birth certificate?

    And deride them (Tea Parties), as I gather from your comments you do, they are probably going to elect a brand-new Congress in the coming election. Then we’ll have a brand-new political discussion. And, because of the constructions of the US Constitution, the matter won’t be settled, and so we’ll carry the discussion over to 2012. At that juncture, in my estimation, the betterment of future generations will start to be greatly improved over the scandalous squandering we see now. And we’ll have had two more years to judge whether Prince Charles is a genius or an idiot.

  213. Leon Brozyna says:

    Out of morbid curiosity, I followed the link at the head of the article to Think Progress. Those comments are so beyond the pale of rational discourse and the way they hide (but not snip) dissenting views is so revealing of a closed mindset.

    So sad.

  214. Dave F says:

    @ Duckster:

    “Everyone has a right to physical, intellectual and spiritual freedoms, and the right to act in whatever ways allow them to maximize well-being, provided that these actions do not interfere with the rights of others to do the same (including future generations).”

    This is impossible. People’s rights will always overlap. It is a simple matter of physical space. Easy to think otherwise in an affluent country, sure, but it is not so simple. If it were, the world be an easier place to live.

  215. Keith Kloor says:

    Anthony,

    The world is full of angry, ideological extremists who sometimes act out violently. Your post (and headline) suggests that environmental rhetoric was culpable in this tragic event. Is that the point you wanted to make with?

    Because judging by the reaction of many readers in this thread, that sure seems the message they walked away with. And many go further and make the connection to certain individuals in the climate debate, such as Al Gore and James Hansen. Do you make a similar connection?

    ===============================

    REPLY:
    Hmm, well, Keith….while you want to impugn me for a headline and some off color comments by people I can’t speak for, how about this one?

    “Apocalypse Suckers”

    Some people might find that headline offensive. If I were named in that story I certainly would. Were you trying to make people who look at doomsday scenarios (Sagan and Nuclear Winter as an example) as a serious threat look stupid? Are you trying to make people that have religious views who fear the bible version of Apocalypse look stupid? Is that the point you wanted to make with?

    Or could people be offended by your flippant remark about “reading the corpse book on the beach” if they’ve recently experienced a death in the family? I know I could be, having been through that. Point is, you don’t always know how people will react to words you write.

    Your post seems prescient given what happened today. The Discovery Channel criminal seemed to have a doomsday fixation brought on by science and media reporting of it. What if a fear of nanobots (as you mention) drives somebody to attack a tech company? Given what we saw today, I’d say it is just as plausible. Would a constant barrage of headlines like “Nanobots accelerating out of a control”, or “Nanobots will killl crops and make disease more likely” effect people who may be unable to separate fact from fiction more likely to react irrationally out of fear?

    I’ve been on the receiving end of fear caused by bad media stories. Once, on Dec 31st, 1997 (El Niño deluge), just before midnight I had to go live on the air to quell a panic in the city of Oroville because a TV station in Sacramento erroneously announced that the Oroville dam had broken and water was flowing towards the city. In fact what had happened was that water was going over the spillway, a concern, but not a disaster yet. But, even trying to calm people with the truth I was villified and cursed in phone calls to our newsroom saying I was hiding the “real” truth, cuz they heard it on that other TV station. Emotions run high, people don’t think rationally, fear takes over. Is that what happened today? It sure looked like it. Do I blame media and people who feed it, yes, they bear a portion of responsibility, but the brunt of it lies with the individual. I say that as a participating member of media. Media needs to report responsibly. I don’t think they’ve done a good job on science and environment.

    I once witnessed an event at a TV station from a crazy person who thought mind control was coming from his TV set. It was a gun and hostage situation like today. Working in TV and radio for 25 years I’ve seen all manner of crazy. I’m hardened with being assaulted at my job in ways you don’t understand nor could have experienced in media. If those experiences made for a poor headline choice, I apologize to people that were offended. We all have bad days. Me lately, I’m having a lot of them.

    By the same token I think you made a bad headline and a flippant remark about death that could be seen as insensitive. Will I beat you up over it and call you a demagogue? No, it’s not worth the effort. All this sniping and what are we accomplishing but elevating the shrillness of the debate?

    The poor headline and flippant remark aside, I agree with the content of your post below. We really should be talking about presenting science in a less frightening manner to the public and quelling bad reporting that lends itself to overly alarming people that can’t make distinctions. But for your purposes now, that’s being ignored and indignation over a headline seems to be juicier fare – Anthony

    here’s Kieth’s post:
    ============

    Apocalypse Suckers
    Posted by: Keith Kloor

    The September issue of Scientific American has a bunch of interesting articles, including this introductory essay on why humans always seem to be fearing one doomsday or another. Here’s the irony:

    You might think that the enterprise of science, with its method and its facts, would inoculate us against the most extravagant doomsday obsessions. But it doesn’t. If anything, it just gives us more to worry about.

    And who are the biggest worry warts? You guessed it:

    Some of the most fervent and convincing doomsayers, after all, are scientists. Bill Joy, co-founder and former chief scientist of Sun Microsystems, has warned that of out-of-control nanobots could consume everything on earth. Astronomer Royal Martin Rees has publicly offered a bet that a biological catastrophe—accidental or intentional—will kill at least one million people by 2020 (so far, no takers). Numerous climatologists sound the alarm about the possibility of runaway global warming. They all stand on the shoulders of giants: British economist Thomas Malthus predicted in the 19th century that the rise in population would lead to widespread famine and catastrophe. It never happened, but that didn’t stop Stanford biologist Paul R. Ehrlich from renewing the warning in his 1968 book The Population Bomb when he predicted that global famine was less than two decades away. Catastrophe didn’t arrive then, either, but does that mean it never will? Not necessarily. Still, people often worry disproportionately about disasters that are unlikely to occur.

    Now we come to the objective of the article:

    Science may be a culprit, but it also offers some explanation for why we can be so fearful. Some researchers think that apocalyptic dread feeds off our collective anxiety about events that lie outside our individual control.

    There’s more to tease you, but it’s just a web preview. To read the whole thing (as well as other articles with titles such as, “The Brief, Eventful Afterlife of a Human Corpse“), I suggest buying a print copy. Seems like perfect beach reading as we wind down summer.

  216. UK Sceptic says:

    I guess the poor, deluded soul got his wish about reducing the human population…

  217. Keith Kloor says:

    Just to clarify: my second comment was a follow-up to an inline response from Anthony to my first comment. Except I see that his response is no longer there. This might just be a technical glitch?

  218. UK Sceptic says:

    How shocking. I’ve just scanned through some of the comments on Think Progress. I do not believe I have ever seen such a large magnitude of intellectual and moral pollution concentrated on one spot. I hope never to see it again.

  219. Keith Kloor,

    Your “take” is wrong.
    I’ve never heard of anybody taking hostages or resorting to any other kind of violence in the name of environmental skepticism.
    Have you?
    If not, why do you spread lies and insults under the pretense of “balanced view”?

  220. My2Cents says:

    While this guy obviously had problems, he, unlike the vast majority of the public that buys into AGW and other environmental fads, was both intelligent enough and honest enough to see through to the conclusions and obvious course of action that his beliefs required. Unfortunately he will be dismissed as just a crank and nut job, otherwise the public might be forced to confront the contradictions inherent in their beliefs that only minor adaptations are required to produce the solutions that they have been convinced are necessary.

    The public believes that solving AGW is simple and painless, however any rational evaluation of the cuts in emissions that are called for in currently scientific (not political) proposals for solving the anticipated crisis can only be achieved by reducing the current global population by at least 60% in the next decade. But this fact has been carefully hidden from the public in all discussions of AGW and its solutions.

  221. Dave Springer says:

    He snapped.

    James Lee that is.

    When you got hundreds of millions of people once in a while one of them is going to snap and do crazy violent things. It’s inevitable when dealing with numbers that large. Quite frankly I’m surprised that it doesn’t happen more often.

  222. Bart says:

    What a low, low article trying to make climate-political hay of a tragedy involving some deranged individual.

    REPLY: Was MSNBC doing the same then when they initially reported on the Gore connection? Was Think Progress doing the same when conservatives were impugned as the culprits in the very first comments?

    – Anthony

  223. co2fan says:

    The usually sensationalist CNN and AP have almost completely ignored the “Eco terrorist” angle. Just move along, just a normal hostage taking.
    At least they didn’t pick upon Joe Romm’s meme of “right wing, anti-immigration”

    Headlines are:
    Police kill gunman who held 3 at Discovery Channel (Yahoo/AP)

    Gunman at Discovery Channel HQ shot dead, hostages rescued (CNN)

    CNN added as a last paragraph:
    Lee said he then felt an ”awakening,” watched former Vice President Al Gore’s documentary ”An Inconvenient Truth,” and decided he had been doing too little to protect the environment.

  224. jaymam says:

    There are other threatening nutters out there.

    Gene from Greenpeace India:
    “If you’re one of those who have spent their lives undermining progressive climate legislation, bankrolling junk science, fueling spurious debates around false solutions, and cattle-prodding democratically-elected governments into submission, then hear this:

    We know who you are. We know where you live. We know where you work.
    And we be many, but you be few.”

    http://www.webcitation.org/5oj86Zw5q

  225. frederik wisse says:

    It was already in ancient greek drama :
    Those who the gods are wishing to destroy are made crazy to begin with !

  226. Leo Norekens says:

    Violence from the environmentalist front isn’t new. Sometimes it’s deranged individuals, like this guy here. Or as in 2002, when Dutch politician Pim Fortuyn was assassinated by a radical environmentalist (and animal rights activist).
    And sometimes it’s organized eco-terrorrism (like ELF or ALF – arson being their preferred tactic) or violent anti-globalization….

    As Flemish journalist Paul Belien http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Beli%C3%ABn put it: “The bullets come from the left. Intolerance today (…) has but one synonym: Left” (http://secessie.nu/?tekst=toonhtml&artikel=904-61 )

  227. Daniel Taylor says:

    These are the demands and sayings of Lee.

    That’s going to be a new Internet meme. It sums up how naive, ignorant, and arrogant he was, all in one signature line.

    Bill Gates should give me his billions because I know how to have more fun than he does. And the Victoria’s Secret models shall live at my house from now on. The Federal government shall tax me no more, and when I drive all people shall pull over so I can get where I’m going faster. These are the demands and sayings of Taylor. :-P

  228. Gnomish says:

    I say play this long and loud! By golly we better make a fuss over it!
    This is the logical consummation of the explicitly stated green ‘virtues’.
    Let it be a ‘learning moment’ – and let us learn.
    Deranged individuals don’t just fall from the sky. They aren’t examples of intelligent design and didn’t fall, ripe and ready, from a tree.

    They were taught. They believed. They rehearsed. Then, they acted.
    We paid for it at every turn. We should stop.

  229. Erik says:

    @Keith Kloor says:

    “Many of you (but not all I stress), including Anthony, are swimming in some slimy waters on this one”
    Argument fail
    —————————————————————————————–
    “Lee said he experienced an ‘‘awakening” when he watched former Vice President Al Gore’s environmental documentary ‘‘An Inconvenient Truth.””
    —————————————————————————————
    Global Warming Fears Seen In Obsessive Compulsive Disorder Patients:
    http://www.voxy.co.nz/national/psychiatry-congress/5/47523

    Baby survives parents’ global warming suicide pact
    A seven-month-old girl survived for three days alone with a bullet in her chest after being shot by her parents as part of a suicide pact over their fears about global warming.:
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/argentina/7344329/Baby-survives-parents-global-warming-suicide-pact.html

  230. _Flin_ says:

    @Ecotretas: Civil disobedience isnt strapping a bomb around yourself, but something like sitting down in front of a bulldozer.

    So some nut grabbed a bomb and hostages and got shot. Noone was hurt (except for him). He wanted to rid the planets of humans. How nice of him to start with himself.

    Usually the “warmistas” actually care for the humans, not the planet. The planet just needs a bit of time (a few million years) to be okay again.

  231. Erik says:

    From the Danish media:

    “Environmental activist killed after hostage Action”
    An armed radical environmental activist, who Wednesday took three people hostage at the TV station, Discovery’s headquarters in the U.S., was shot and killed by police. Hostages are unharmed, police said.
    http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=da&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=da&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dr.dk%2FNyheder%2FUdland%2F2010%2F09%2F02%2F095857.htm

  232. Stefan says:

    The poor headline and flippant remark aside, I agree with the content of your post below. We really should be talking about presenting science in a less frightening manner to the public and quelling bad reporting that lends itself to overly alarming people that can’t make distinctions. But for your purposes now, that’s being ignored and indignation over a headline seems to be juicier fare – Anthony

    I’d like to add one point from developmental psychology (IANAP, but here goes).

    Every child born is born pre-ego, and has to develop, grow up, create a healthy modern rational thinking ego, and get on with adult life. But every child born has to go through this process and the process can stall at earlier stages, be it cognitively, morally, emotionally, etc.

    What it means is that there is always a fresh supply of people who are intellectually capable of understanding global issues, but are in other ways pre-modern, pre-rational, pre-healthy ego. Many of the world’s terrorists fit this profile, where their basic drive is anger and power (like an angry small child) but intellectually they take up some cause or other. The cause may sound noble, but their drive is infantile. So they figure, nobody but me understands the truth, nobody but me cares, nobody but me matters, nobody but me is worth anything. And they hook that ruthless drive into a cause, with catastrophic consequences. Ruthless, because they only see their own “me” point of view, and can’t comprehend that others might have other points of view that are better.

    The point is, every human being has to grow up, and in most parts of the world, people are not living in conditions that are conducive to people maturing into modern rational egos that can take the views of many others into account, and value those others.

    So there is an actual danger, when people promoting a cause decide to use fear as a means to gain publicity, and when in service of that cause they start to talk about dismantling civilisation. Because the pre-modern mind never liked the modern world anyway (see, it’s where people are always listening to each other). The pre-modern childish mind much prefers dictatorships, power, aggression, and domination. And if an individual can’t become dictator, they can become terrorist. (It carries the same lack of healthy regard for other human beings.)

    So, as noble and important as environmentalism is, and it is, it must try to steer clear of using messages that appeal to pre-modern power drives, because in fact, most of the world, because most of the world lives in poverty, in sorta feudal conditions in some places, most of the world’s people are not post-modern egalitarian sensitive world carers, they are pre-modern power driven angry ruthless individuals. (They can’t afford modern sensibilities, because their lives are usually too hard and basic for those to be useful.)

    If someone wants to talk about the world ending due to global warming, what terrorist can resist using that as the ultimate justification for their most brutal and mindless actions?

    Remember, the key point from developmental psychology is that all humans are born at stage zero, pre-ego, pre-rational, pre-sensitive self, pre-morality, and that a significant percentage remain at infantile stages in various ways. So there is always a fresh supply of potential terrorists. (It is a very bleak picture but there it is.)

  233. Katabasis says:

    I’m having difficulty understanding why this thread is “despicable”. Why is discussion on this now verboten, and who are you people to demand this?

    Ten years ago I could not possibly have imagined that we would now be in a situation where artists, comedians and others would be terrified of drawning a potato and calling it “Mohammed”. But it has happened.

    It behoves us to ask in this situation what kind of chilling effect this could have on any news provider’s willingness to even engage “the other side”, especially if there are repeat incidents and if what other posters are saying is true, this behaviour is even being praised elsewhere.

    And yet the chilling is already starting from another angle – some of you are claiming that we cannot even discuss this event in the context that he may have been motivated by fundamentalist catastrophic warmism because he was “obviously” mentally ill. Maybe he was, maybe he wasn’t. I don’t see any a priori reason why debate should be shut down because of this speculation. Frankly, stating that it should be seems like a colossal cop-out. I spent thirteen years of my life dealing with violent people as a nightclub doorman – people who use guns and extort behaviour or goods under menaces are not to be regarded as immediately insane.

  234. Chris H says:

    I made the mistake of checking out the “Think Progress” blog. Oh my, so much anger and hatred. It made me nauseated. What was described was neither coherent thought, nor progressive. The hostage taker was derided as “right wing” when his population control theories and reversion to earlier cultural forms are all very firmly left wing as are his views on the status of humans on this planet and the need for authoritarian government to effect his desired changes. The lack of rationality in the hostage taker’s views and in those expressed in the “Think Progress” blog together with the intolerance of the views of others is typical of those who have left reason far behind. I commend Melanie Phillips’ book “The World Turned Upside Down” for a logical description as to how these disordered thought processes have taken root.

  235. wwf says:

    [invalid email address ~ ctm]

    going back and deleting others. you were warned.

  236. Bill Tuttle says:

    Keith Kloor: September 1, 2010 at 10:30 pm
    Many of you (but not all I stress), including Anthony, are swimming in some slimy waters on this one. Here’s my take: [link to article]

    Your opprobrium is touching, but fallacious. There is nothing wrong with condemning Mr. Lee’s actions, regardless of his mental state or capacity.

  237. TomVonk says:

    I was also puzzled by the question of mental illness and showed this case to a friend who is MedDr and psychiatrist in Strasburg hospital .

    He told me that from the legal point of view (under french law) this person would be considered as fully responsible of his acts without a possibility to plead temporary or chronical abolishment of discernement ability . So legally not mentally ill .
    From the medical point of view he thinks that there are symptoms of personality disorder like anti social behaviour and phobias .
    These can be considered as mental illnesses but from what I understood there are millions of forms of personality disorders ranging between slightly impairing and fully incapacitating .
    He also said that if he examines a random sample of people (you , me , your neighbour) in about 1/3 of cases a form of mental disorder will be found , the most common being depressive and anxiety states .
    So it looks like (this is my inference) that this person was not more mentally ill than a Greenpeace activist driving his ship with a collision intent or a Jehovah witness preventing his children to get a blood transfusion .
    .
    These speculations will be commented in many medical analysis that will certainly appear in the US media today or tomorrow . However as it often goes regarding mental illness , the experts will almost certainly not agree in their diagnostics .

  238. TomVonk says:

    Stefan
    So there is an actual danger, when people promoting a cause decide to use fear as a means to gain publicity, and when in service of that cause they start to talk about dismantling civilisation. Because the pre-modern mind never liked the modern world anyway (see, it’s where people are always listening to each other). The pre-modern childish mind much prefers dictatorships, power, aggression, and domination. And if an individual can’t become dictator, they can become terrorist. (It carries the same lack of healthy regard for other human beings.)

    I fully subscribe to this .

  239. Severian says:

    UK Sceptic says: “How shocking. I’ve just scanned through some of the comments on Think Progress. I do not believe I have ever seen such a large magnitude of intellectual and moral pollution concentrated on one spot. I hope never to see it again.”

    Scary isn’t it? I think a lot of the people commenting there are only a few ticks away from doing the same thing as Lee. A toxic combination of anger and self righteousness makes it all too easy to rationalize the most heinous of actions.

    I’d strongly recommend Eric Hoffer’s book “The True Believer” to get a look into the minds of such people. One of his quotes “A man who’s business is not worth minding, will console himself by trying to mind yours.” Pretty much describes the ec0-left.

  240. Noelene says:

    When I see how he describes children as filthy human children,I can’t spare much sympathy for him.
    He really had a problem with babies and children.Oil is not filthy,pollution is not filthy,but babies and children are.I’m glad he picked a place where no children were.

  241. Robert of Ottawa says:

    Saving the planet … one enviromentalist at a time.

  242. John Silver says:

    Lady McRomm is going crazy.
    The spot won’t go out.

  243. John Whitman says:

    Terrorists are just plain criminals and deserve no special consideration. Sympathy? I have sympathy for those that are terrorized, not for the terrorist.

    Mr. Lee committed a terrorist act.

    Terrorists believe they are morally justified in carrying out violent crimes. Having that belief may be a sign of sociopathic behavior or not. Was Mr. Lee reported to be a member of an organization that was somehow involved with his terrorist act? I did not see any evidence in the blogs or any news media reporting on it.

    Mr. Lee’s manifesto certainly does contain express statements of the tenets of some of the varieties of ideological environmentalism. Was Mr. Lee aware that some ideological environmentalists advocate violence to futher their cause? I do not know, but by his manifesto he seemed aware of some body of literature from the ideological environmentalists.

    Watch how the media spin this regarding eco relevant or politically relevant. It will provide a data point about whether the media really are moving toward balance in reporting on AGW.

    John

  244. Gail Combs says:

    Graeme says:
    September 1, 2010 at 4:29 pm

    I’m sorry, unless evidence turns up that this guy had been certified in the past, I’m not buying the idea that he was insane……
    _______________________________________________________________________
    Depends on the “definition of “insane” if Lee was “insane” then a whole lot of professors teaching in Colleges and Universities are too and they are “infecting” their students and others with their brand of insanity – hatred of the “affluent middle class.”

    For example University of Texas professor, Eric Pianka who “declared that AIDS was not killing off the surplus human population fast enough. What is needed, he said, is Ebola to kill 5.8 billion of the world’s 6 billion plus humans. The speech received a prolonged standing ovation at the Academy’s annual meeting at Lamar University in Beaumont…” (I find that chilling)

    Or Prince Philip who said: “If I were reincarnated, I would come back, return to the Earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels.”

    Or Ward Churchill, former ethnic studies professor, essay about the justice of 9/11: “Some People Push Back”: On the Justice of Roosting Chickens

    Or the local professor here in North Carolina who I heard give radio talks right after 9/11 saying we Americans deserved the terrorist strike “shortly after Sept. 11,

    What I find interesting is we see college textbooks such as John Holdren, Obama’s Science Czar’s, Ecoscience yet in an essay, Ignoring Elites, Historians Are Missing a Major Factor in Politics and History Steve Fraser & Gary Gerstel: state “… Over the last quarter-century, historians have by and large ceased writing about the role of ruling elites in the country’s evolution. Or if they have taken up the subject, they have done so to argue against its salience for grasping the essentials of American political history. Yet there is something peculiar about this recent intellectual aversion….”

    You also have Maurice Strong who squarely places “blame” on the middle class at the Rio Conference in 1992. “It is clear that current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class — involving high meat intake, consumption of large amounts of frozen and convenience foods, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work-place air-conditioning, and suburban housing — are not sustainable….”

    Is it any wonder that many people hate the “affluent middle class” and consider it OK to kill them off? Seems that the “affluent middle class” have been made the scape goat for everything that goes wrong. I sure hope people wake up to the misdirection before more tragedies strike the innocent.

  245. Dan says:

    It’s sad, but telling, that many of the commenters on the “Think Progress” blog saw only Lee’s comments on immigration and not what he had to say about global warming, use of earth’s resources and militarism. The last three could have been lifted from any lefty blog. Obviously, he was a nut job, but I had to laugh when a brief screen shot of “Inconvenient Truth” was juxtaposed with the hostage crisis on–of all things–the CBS Evening News.

  246. Keith Kloor says:

    Anthony,

    Your citation of my “Apocalypse Suckers” post headline as being guilty of similar insensitivity is odd. That post was written yesterday morning, well before the Lee incident became public (I personally didn’t hear about it till late afternoon). Additionally, it was playing off a magazine article; yours played off the raw emotion of violent act in progress.

    If your point was to talk about Lee’s manifesto, you sure went about it the wrong way. I think you realize it now but can’t quite bring yourself to admit it.

    The rest of you who see nothing wrong with the headline or the derogatory references to Gore, Hansen, et al are showing impressive powers of rationalization, especially when you point to the liberal comment thread carrying similarly derogatory references to conservatives.

  247. Terry says:

    1) Why are you giving this idiot’s ramblings any space at all? The media has demonstrated a perfect way to get kooky peoples’ idiocy looked at by everybody: Put your rants on a website, strap yourself with bombs, take hostages. Immediately your words are being read by the masses. Mission accomplished.

    2) Why do you pay attention to MSNBC at all?

  248. Bruce Cobb says:

    It seems the eco-loon warmenistas are in denial as to who and what Lee was – simply a reflection, albeit an extreme one, of themselves. I guess it can be tough to take, having a mirror held up and seeing evil staring back at you.

  249. John Whitman says:

    The Romm(-ulan) credo: “If we just keep saying we believe, over and over then everything will be OK in spite of reality. If reality does get too close we then destroy it.”

    John

  250. FergalR says:

    Keith Kloor,

    Or should I say Dr. Keith Kloor, PsyD. Whilst your talents for diagnosing mental illness remotely – and backwards in time – are impressive, might I suggest you examine your own state of mind?

    Gore and Hansen have both called for criminality in pursuit of their pet cause.

    US science Czar John Holdren’s views on population concur pretty well with the late Mr. Lee’s.

    Where exactly is the disconnect in your ability to think?

  251. Bruce Cobb says:

    ABC News is describing him as an “environmental militant”: http://abcnews.go.com/US/gunman-enters-discovery-channel-headquarters-employees-evacuated/story?id=11535128
    Wonder what the nutjobs at “Think Progress” would have to say about that?

  252. James Sexton says:

    Duckster says:
    September 1, 2010 at 8:34 pm

    Sorry, I somehow missed your response to me. I’m glad we can agree on many things.

    You said, “You need to add one caveat (and this caveat provides a logical – rather than religious – basis for morality). I would rephrase it thusly:”

    I rather thought it went without saying. But I’d like to point out, it is the internal(personal) restraint that prevents immoral acts, governments is woefully inadequate in this regard.

    You said, “Everyone has a right to physical, intellectual and spiritual freedoms, and the right to act in whatever ways allow them to maximize well-being, provided that these actions do not interfere with the rights of others to do the same (including future generations).”

    Well that’s the rub, isn’t it? How do you or anyone else know about what is good for future generations? Many actions of the past by our forefathers would seem counter-intuitive towards the welfare of future generations. For example, the hunting of the N.A. bison. Many would look as this as an egregious act, many still do. I maintain it was a necessary step towards ensure the safety and prosperity of later generations. Of course there are many other examples, I use this as an illustration of how we can’t possibly know what is or isn’t beneficial to future generations.

    You said, So you’ll forgive me if I get a little upset when I hear comments such as: Environmentalism? Socialism? – apart from the labels I didn’t know that there was a difference…….. I do think we might need to kick start the process a little, which is why I favor a flat carbon tax which is 100% redistributed back to tax payers through tax credits.

    Duckster, for today, whether we like it or not, CO2 emissions are proxy for economic growth. Any carbon tax will inhibit growth and initiative. You didn’t go into detail about the your idea and I’m glad you didn’t. Wealth “redistribution” is a socialist/communist concept. So forgive people if they get confused by equating environmentalism with socialism. The policies enacted for environmental reasons are strikingly similar to socialist concepts.

    You said, You do yourselves a disservice by not challenging extremist rhetoric (on either side) on this site. I am not saying it should be suppressed (it shouldn’t be), but just because it is on “your side” doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be called out.

    I agree, but again, I’ll point out the difference of the rhetoric. When a skeptics shows how environmental policies parallel socialist/communist goals, that’s called reality and needs to be highlighted. (Such as wealth redistribution, attacks on production(by policies and law), and businesses, ect.) When Hansen makes references to death trains, it is simply a skewed perspective that has no historical context other than the ones previously pointed out. It is in error and seems to be a bit of projection for Mr. Hansen given his obvious anti-capitalist leanings.

  253. Keith Kloor says:

    FergalR,

    Well I have friends who are shrinks, so maybe I’m picking up something from them. But seriously, can you point to specific comments by Gore or Hansen that incite people to violence? What criminality have they called for “in pursuit of their pet cause”?

  254. Larry Geiger says:

    “have a look at the 495 comments on his parent blog “Think Progress” .
    Now that’s just plain creepy. I sort of peeked at about 50 entries and then gave up.
    Don’t go there.

  255. RW says:

    How truly repulsive this post is, to use the sad life and untimely death of a mentally ill person in such a nasty way. Shame on you.

  256. FergalR says:

    Keith Kloor,
    So, Keith, you have friends who are “shrinks”, but you’re not one. And your psychiatric compadres have diagnosed James Lee RIP at a distance before consulting with you.

    Hansen and Gore have both called for civil disobedience. Civil disobedience is by its nature illegal and criminal.

    You’re wrong Mr. Kloor.

  257. Pascvaks says:

    People are only human, they’re capable of doing anything. Anything at all. When things like this happen, and it is thrown in our faces, and we are forced to react to it, we rarely say what only time and proper thought and reflection bring us to conclude about the matter; frequently, our first reaction is toward the horor and insanity of it, and this is often expressed from the gut, not the head. When listening to someone speak from the gut, do not think that is everything they have to say, or that they have ‘thought’ much about it.

  258. Whereas on this site, everyone cherrypicks the global warming references in this madman’s manifesto, the commentators on the other site Think Progress notice he is anti-immigration. Using exactly the same ‘logic’, they reach conclusions diametrically opposed to those expressed here.

    The First Amendment depends on a rigid separation of ideas and actions – many unscrupulous or naive people try to undermine that separation. One can do a course in ‘Hate Studies’ where seriously academic, but right-wing, ideas are delegitimized.

  259. INGSOC says:

    Well, its “the Discovery Massacre” +1. Global TV, the largest broadcaster in BC, made no mention at all of the incident in the first 30 minutes of their morning “news” show. I am certain their in house behavioral psychologists have deemed that the story as it happened goes contrary to their social programming, and will receive what I now call “the climategate treatment”. Namely; no mention beyond a brief and passing reference to an “incident” with no qualifying commentary whatsoever. This well used method is however, losing its efficacy due to alternative media providing coverage that is not in accord with their (“mainstream” media’s) efforts, resulting in a growing distrust of mainstream media in general. A further and more damaging consequence of using “the climategate method”, is in addition to populations losing faith in their media controllers, large groups are actually coming to conclusions that have not been designed for the maintenance of the current regime at all. In other words; people are determining the meaning of information that has heretofore been carefully structured for maximum control, entirely on their own. With no preconditioning! This is inexorably leading to the continued collapse of the current western governing strategy, regardless of efforts to prop up the power structure.

    Please discuss.

  260. Smokey says:

    RW says:

    “How truly repulsive this post is, to use the sad life and untimely death of a mentally ill person in such a nasty way. Shame on you.”

    This eco-felon wasn’t “mentally ill,” he was just angry and impotent. So he decided to get even with society for not following his eco-wacko CAGW views by using violence. It is ‘repulsive’ to give this eco-criminal an easy pass by labeling him ‘mentally ill.’

    And the real ‘shame’ is harping on the mote in someone else’s eye — while ignoring the beam in one’s own eye: James Hansen has shown by his own example his approval and condoning of breaking the law, and by his threats against honest people conducting legitimate, law-abiding businesses. The alarmist contingent has no concept of shame.

  261. boballab says:

    Keith Kloor says:
    September 2, 2010 at 6:34 am
    FergalR,

    Well I have friends who are shrinks, so maybe I’m picking up something from them. But seriously, can you point to specific comments by Gore or Hansen that incite people to violence? What criminality have they called for “in pursuit of their pet cause”?

    Hmm how about this:

    If we cannot stop the building of more coal-fired power plants, those coal trains will be death trains — no less gruesome than if they were boxcars headed to crematoria, loaded with uncountable irreplaceable species.

    Keith even Joe Romm was able to grasp what that alluded to:

    That said, “boxcars headed to crematoria” is a very loaded phrase, inevitably conjuring up the Nazi’s extermination of the Jews, a connection everyone, including Hansen, should be cautious about making. [I actually can't think of a good analogy for what global warming may do to this planet -- it is so far beyond anything that has happened in human history.]

    Now take that with with this:

    SUNDIAL, West Virginia, June 23, 2009 (ENS) – West Virginia State Police today arrested at least 29 demonstrators, including government climate scientist Dr. James Hansen, actress Daryl Hannah, and 94 year-old former West Virginia Congressman Ken Hechler, for trespassing on the property of a mountaintop removal coal mining company to protest the destructive practice.
    The protesters deliberately entered the Goals Coal plant owned by coal giant Massey Energy to draw public attention to the destruction of mountains immediately above the Coal River Valley community of Sundial in Raleigh County.

    The demonstrators attempted to deliver a letter of demands to the company regarding this facility, which they say threatens the students at Marsh Fork Elementary School.

    http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jun2009/2009-06-23-01.asp

    Could a person that is mentally disturb misinterpret that? In the first quote Dr. Hansen alluded to that unless we stop the coal plants the froggies, bunnies, and the Squirrels get the death train treatment. Then combine that to when Dr. Hansen tried to deliver a “List of Demands” to a company: he got arrested. So could a man that is clearly not of sound mind determine that to get his “List of Demands” acted on he needed weapons?

    Where you and I being [assumed :) ] of sound mind and able to distinguish the differences involved someone not mentally sound that looks at what Dr. Hansen has said about the urgency of action, about “death trains and seen Dr. Hansen arrested when trying to peacefully stop things from happening might take things to a different level.

    Keep this in mind Keith; that the left has a habit of calling those they disagree with of inciting violence, when they have never specifically said anything about advocating violence. The classic example is the “Tea Party”. So if those on the left do not like being tarred with their own brush, maybe they shouldn’t have used it themselves. It also brings to mind the old metaphor about what’s good for the goose, is good for the gander.

  262. Djozar says:

    There have been zealots for every cause since at least the Maccabee’s, and zealots become martyrs. It really says little about the cause they back or the cause they oppose; it’s just irrational violence.

  263. Myron Mesecke says:

    Remember when music and video games were blamed for the violent acts that people did and it was said they ought to be banned? I’m waiting for calls for Al Gore’s movie to be banned after this violent act.

    crickets chirping…

  264. Vince Causey says:

    It’s very disappointing to learn that James Lee has died. I was anticipating a trial where his defence attorneys bring in An Inconvenient Truth, and cite pronouncements by Hansen. That is a lot of mud – some of it would surely stick.

  265. kadaka (KD Knoebel) says:

    From: _Flin_ on September 2, 2010 at 2:10 am

    Usually the “warmistas” actually care for the humans, not the planet. The planet just needs a bit of time (a few million years) to be okay again.

    That you can think the planet is not “okay” right now, and may need a few million years to “get better,” says enough. Mankind is at worst an irritant in the biosphere, which is itself just a thin layer of “scum” that grew on top of a considerable mass of rock (solid and molten) that is quite insensitive to anything we do. Whatever mankind has done, good or bad, will be obliterated during the next major glaciation (ice age) as the biosphere is “reset”, except for a few buried remains of no consequence, and there might still be some humans on the planet living an ultra-low-consumption lifestyle as they won’t have a choice otherwise with so many resources rendered unavailable under billions of tonnes of ice.

    Given the normal timing of the major glaciations, in less than 100,000 years from now it’ll be like humans, with our mighty civilizations that so many think are wreaking havoc with and may destroy the planet, never existed. Might only be 10,000 years. It will definitely take less time than “a few million years.”

    A curious thought just occurred to me. I wonder if I should check on something at the cemetery where we left the former shell my father wore. Included when he bought that lot was “perpetual care”; I wonder what is their “in case of glaciation” plan.

  266. Bill Tuttle says:

    Rod McLaughlin: September 2, 2010 at 7:11 am
    Whereas on this site, everyone cherrypicks the global warming references in this madman’s manifesto, the commentators on the other site Think Progress notice he is anti-immigration. Using exactly the same ‘logic’, they reach conclusions diametrically opposed to those expressed here.

    His entire *manifesto* is eco-moonbatic Malthusianism. Delving into two-plus pages of spittle-flickings to find his single anti-immigration rant is cherry-picking.

  267. Tom Rowan says:

    Looks like global warming has affected wildlife like Unibombers, Discoverybombers, and, of course, the squirrels in the MSM.

  268. Pascvaks says:

    Ref – Smokey says:
    September 2, 2010 at 7:24 am
    ..”This eco-felon wasn’t “mentally ill,”..”

    Ref – Djozar says:
    September 2, 2010 at 7:30 am
    “There have been zealots for every cause since at least the Maccabee’s, and zealots become martyrs. It really says little about the cause they back or the cause they oppose; it’s just irrational violence.”

    ______________

    Suicide Bombers are not unique to the Middle East. There are even jihadists who claim to be Christian or Hindu or Shinto or Buddist or Jewish or atheist or ‘x’. Human mental health is a very ill-defined condition. It’s more chemical than most are willing to ever admit and there are more exceptions to the rule than you or I can shake a thousand sticks at. I have no doubt that one day soon some “science” person with a PhD in something is going to find a way, based on a computer model, to identify these whackos before they are allowed to reproduce (or be born), and things won’t be so hot and dangerous anymore;-)

  269. Bruce Cobb says:

    Rod McLaughlin says:
    September 2, 2010 at 7:11 am

    Whereas on this site, everyone cherrypicks the global warming references in this madman’s manifesto, the commentators on the other site Think Progress notice he is anti-immigration. Using exactly the same ‘logic’, they reach conclusions diametrically opposed to those expressed here.

    You misunderstand the idea of cherry picking, which is, out of the many available you pick the one that “proves” your point. I guess you didn’t happen to notice that the immigration thing was only one of 11 “demands”? This doesn’t even include the long enviro-socio Malthusian rant afterwards, which never even mentions immigration.
    So, who is the one cherry picking?

  270. James Sexton says:

    Rod McLaughlin says:
    September 2, 2010 at 7:11 am

    “Whereas on this site, everyone cherrypicks the global warming references in this madman’s manifesto, the commentators on the other site Think Progress notice he is anti-immigration. Using exactly the same ‘logic’, they reach conclusions diametrically opposed to those expressed here.”

    Rod, a couple of points of clarification. The “anti-immigration reference was in only one of the 11 demands he made. The demands constituted about half of his “manifesto”. The rest was dedicated to environmental talking points blatherings or simple ramblings. So, with less than 5% of his idiocy dedicated to “Immigration” issues, it would be disingenuous to depict his “manifesto” as the ramblings of a right-wing nut. But, given the content of the majority of his “manifesto” it is perfectly reasonable to depict his “manifesto” as the ramblings of a left-wing nut or an enviro-whack job, because it does indeed contain many of the same demands, albeit not at the point of a gun, that we hear on a daily basis from the left-wing enviro- movement.

    Also, I’m a conservative, I know of no one that is “anti-immigration”. Many of us are anti-illegal immigration but that is a large distinction.

  271. PhilJourdan says:

    Dave Worley says:
    September 1, 2010 at 5:03 pm

    You get the prize for the first one to report it correctly! ;)

    We have Godwin’s law (about Nazis). When is someone going to come up with a law about blaming Bush? He gets more blame and comparisons than the Nazis do.

  272. James Sexton says:

    @Rod McLaughlin

    I think this serves to illustrate many of the points attempting to be made here. I find this absolutely astonishing, ——-from another site,

    “ellielight

    When the earth is under attack, it takes a brave, principled hero to stand up for what is right. James Jay Lee was such a person. His desparation can be traced directly back to George Bush’s violent siege against the environment. I just wish Mr. Lee would have been more patient because Obama and the Democrats are completely on his side and were in the process of fulfilling his mandate. After the elctions, the Democrats WILL pass a set of environmental regulations that will begin reversing the damage cause by the Republicans and right wing money grabbers / planet rapers.”

    There’s plenty to comment on, but I’ll just let it soak in for a moment.

  273. Djozar says:

    Pascvaks says:

    I wan’t trying to focus on the middle east; it’s just the earliest records I know of people performing suicidal acts were in that period. I sure it spans all cultures and time periods; I just don’t have the resources to back it up.

  274. PhilJourdan says:

    Keith Kloor says:
    September 1, 2010 at 10:30 pm
    Many of you (but not all I stress), including Anthony, are swimming in some slimy waters on this one. Here’s my take:
    http://www.collide-a-scape.com/2010/09/02/demagogue-meet-demagogue/

    Keith, thanks for the quick synopsis from the “Progress” side. Anthony did not provide a link, and I try to avoid that site in any event.

  275. Chris Winter says:

    Leo Norekens (September 2, 2010 at 1:32 am) quoted Flemish journalist Paul Belien: “The bullets come from the left. Intolerance today (…) has but one synonym: Left”

    Quote that to the family of Dr. George Tiller and see what response you get.

    To generalize: Many in this thread have claimed this man James Lee was driven to his mad act by “warmist” incitement, especially by statements from
    Al Gore and James Hansen. But advocating civil disobedience is far different from advocating violence.

    More to the point, how can this discussion of incitement have gotten so far with no mention of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and their ilk?

  276. Gail Combs says:

    Keith Kloor says:
    September 2, 2010 at 5:44 am

    …….The rest of you who see nothing wrong with the headline or the derogatory references to Gore, Hansen, et al are showing impressive powers of rationalization, especially when you point to the liberal comment thread carrying similarly derogatory references to conservatives.
    _________________________________________________
    …But seriously, can you point to specific comments by Gore or Hansen that incite people to violence? What criminality have they called for “in pursuit of their pet cause”?
    __________________________________________________
    These men are professionals, they are in the public eye and therefore have a “higher accountability” for their actions just as a doctor is held to a higher stand than that of a layman. That is the part most people miss. If a singer on stage shouts FIRE into a microphone he is more “accountable ethically” than some smart mouthed teenager in the back row.

    So how about this for evidence they were intentionally stirring people up?

    “For two decades, scientists and environmental campaigners have been on an ongoing quest for imagery and analogies sufficiently jarring to focus public attention on global warming and motivate a climate-friendly change in how we get and use energy.”

    Mr. Naasz wrote:

    “The suggestion that coal utilization for electricity generation can be equated with the systematic extermination of European Jewry is both repellant and preposterous”

    Dr. Hansen response on this point was:

    “There is nothing scientifically invalid about the above paragraph. If this paragraph makes you uncomfortable, well, perhaps it should.”

    They even used Stan Greenberg a very talented propagandist for a multi-year campaign on global warming. Republican pollster Frank Luntz says “Stan Greenberg scares the hell out of me. He doesn’t just have a finger on the people’s pulse; he’s got an IV injected into it. He’s the best.”

    For criminality you have to look no further than Al Gore, Maurice Strong and the Molten Metal Inc Scam run on the First Earth Day no less.

    http://www.nytimes.com/1997/11/04/us/panel-to-quiz-clinton-s-96-campaign-chief-on-stock-gift.html?sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all

    Lawsuit:
    http://securities.stanford.edu/1008/AxlervMoltenMeta/001.html

    House Committee investigation:
    http://oversight.house.gov/documents/20040830154236-07181.pdf

    It is about time public figures are held accountable for their irresponsible behavior. I do not care who they are or what side of an argument they represent.

  277. Rob Honeycutt says:

    Anthony, I really don’t understand why you are choosing to trumpet James Lee as some kind of example of the left. This has far more to do with the mental stability of one individual than any given issue. Lee could have just as easily been “awakened” by something Glenn Beck said.

    Taking a stance like this with your blog has the potential to come back and bite you when someone else comes out to take hostages based on fears of the NWO based on the presentations of Chris Monckton.

    To use the psychosis of one individual as a platform for your issues puts you on a very shaky stage. My suggestion would be to stick to firmer ground. This would apply both you and Joe Romm.

    REPLY: see the main page for the latest post on the issue – Anthony

  278. PhilJourdan says:

    Rod McLaughlin says:
    September 2, 2010 at 7:11 am
    Whereas on this site, everyone cherrypicks the global warming references in this madman’s manifesto, the commentators on the other site Think Progress notice he is anti-immigration.

    Incorrect. His diatribe against “anchor babies” indicates he is anti ILLEGAL immigrants since legal ones do not have “anchor babies”. They do not need them. They are living here legally.

  279. Chris Winter says:

    James Sexton (September 2, 2010 at 6:26 am ) wrote: “Duckster, for today, whether we like it or not, CO2 emissions are proxy for economic growth.”

    Sure. So is pollution. It does not follow that more pollution, or more CO2, is desirable.

    “Any carbon tax will inhibit growth and initiative.”

    Except when it stimulates the initiative to develop less expensive means of generating and delivering clean energy, and fosters the growth of jobs and industries based on them.

    “Wealth ‘redistribution’ is a socialist/communist concept.”

    How about the recent Republican attempt to end the estate tax? That would have cost the government close to a trillion dollars over ten years, while benefitting only the wealthiest 0.3 percent of Americans. Does that qualify as wealth redistribution? If not, why not?

  280. Zeke the Sneak says:

    I do not see anything illogical about what he is saying. It all follows perfectly from basic environmental doctrine of the destruction of the earth calculated in terms of human population and consumption – that is, “sustainability.”

    The shock is that it is directed at the actual purveyers of the sustainablility propaganda.

  281. Chris Winter says:

    My2Cents (September 2, 2010 at 12:25 am) wrote:

    “While this guy obviously had problems, he, unlike the vast majority of the public that buys into AGW and other environmental fads, was both intelligent enough and honest enough to see through to the conclusions and obvious course of action that his beliefs required. Unfortunately he will be dismissed as just a crank and nut job, otherwise the public might be forced to confront the contradictions inherent in their beliefs that only minor adaptations are required to produce the solutions that they have been convinced are necessary.

    The public believes that solving AGW is simple and painless, however any rational evaluation of the cuts in emissions that are called for in currently scientific (not political) proposals for solving the anticipated crisis can only be achieved by reducing the current global population by at least 60% in the next decade. But this fact has been carefully hidden from the public in all discussions of AGW and its solutions.”

    How could they believe “solving AGW is simple and painless” when even the first-step measures (like the Kyoto Protocol) are derided by so many voices — mostly of the Republican persuasion — as disastrously punitive to the point of “destroying the economy”?

    And who has said the solution requires the deaths of three-fifths of the world’s population over the next ten years? Because I’ve been following the AGW controversy for years, and I’d never seen that claim until you made it.

    And to hypothesize: Suppose this became widely believed. Might it drive some other unbalanced individual to violence?

  282. Pascvaks says:

    Ref – Djozar says:
    September 2, 2010 at 8:34 am

    No slight intended. The two of you gave me the idea for the thought I expressed. As you say, they’ve been with us a long, long time. Thanks again!

  283. James Sexton says:

    Rob Honeycutt says:
    September 2, 2010 at 8:47 am

    I really don’t think Anthony is doing any “trumpeting”, but, of course you are correct. One whacko doesn’t make an entire movement. That being said, it is fun to watch the leftistas dance the jig of hypocrisy. I can’t tell you how many times in print I read where Dr. Tiller’s murder was predictable because of the rhetoric of the right-to-life people. Or how OK city is laid at the feet of conservatives. Domestic terrorist I believe was the term thrown around so often. It was all so predictable at the time, with all the right-wing rhetoric and Rush Limbaugh and all. Yet today, Lee, isn’t an ideologue, he isn’t a terrorist, he’s just a whack-job. Same as the guy at Ft. Hood.

    To the leftists so quick to blame conservatism for Tiller and OK city,……………… dance puppet boys! Talk yourself into circles. Now you want the rhetoric to be toned down? Shouldn’t you had said something when Hansen was doing his death train gig? Or all the other insipidly vapid statements made disparaging anyone who dared to doubt CO2 as a cause for our certain doom? Dance.

  284. Aldi says:

    We were warned…..but we didn’t listen.
    http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/green/articles/2009/02/09/climate_change_takes_a_mental_toll/

    There you have it, everything is caused by global warming. If we only ruined our economy.

  285. KenB says:

    Interesting to see the very people who created the nonsense of scary predictions as justified by a conception of post normal/modern science, and even when shown to be wrong, can’t admit they were wrong, or even slightly wrong, and continue to project blind zealous faith, now blame everyone else for those consequences. They have filled fragile minds with incredible garbage in the name offlawed science, yet they can’t make the connection when those fragile minds cut loose.

    I get concerned when I drop by some of the blogs and see the fruits of their labour wishing that mankind would perish so the world would be better off, and even worse comments like we need a better aids epidemic, as if that is a panacea for all the scary science these guys have invented, cast from their “tell me the answer I want, climate models” or is it crystal ball science.

    Time that thinking scientists spoke up and squashed this stupidity before more people are hurt.

    Without the Hysteria generated by the likes of Al Gore in promotion of his agenda, and that of the UN, we may have sorted the unknowns of climate science, by way of rational discussion between scientists and, in that orderly and truly scientific process, saved more than enough in terms of money to provide health programs and social improvement throughout the World.

    The Romms and their fellow travellers of post modern science, have set this scenario in the way they hyped the minimum then whipped up the scare to the maximum and twisted results to create a climate of fear. They need to take a good hard look at themselves before trying to accuse others.

  286. Henry chance says:

    Lee said he experienced an ‘‘awakening” when he watched former Vice President Al Gore’s environmental documentary ‘‘An Inconvenient Truth.”
    “Hey – it’s a planetary emergency, a climate crisis. We have only a few years, or months even. The tipping point is here. This summer’s extremes confirm it. So action has to be taken!

    “Nothing is more important than saving … the Lions, Tigers, Giraffes, Elephants, Froggies, Turtles, Apes, Raccoons, Beetles, Ants, Sharks, Bears, and, of course, the Squirrels. The humans? The planet does not need humans.”

    As I posted this earlier.
    If I read what science Czar Holdren says, Lee seems pretty accurate in tracking the green and warmista agenda.
    The sex poodle is such a teaser. Has James Hansen done his press release?

  287. DirkH says:

    JimF says:
    September 1, 2010 at 9:47 pm
    “[...]So, how do we measure the rights of future generations? If, for example, Henry Ford had a prophetic dream and saw the carnage of 40,000 deaths per year on the highway because of his development of an affordable car, would he have built it?[...]”

    Yes, because that would have been a real improvement over the number of people killed or injured in horse- and oxcart-related accidents; taking number of kilometers travelled and population growth into account. You know, horses have an abysmal safety track record. Also, the number of horse stables in a city like New York together with the need for straw to feed them resulted in frequent fires.

  288. Johnb says:

    ‘First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”

    – Mahatma Gandhi

  289. pwl says:

    “Lee said he experienced an ‘‘awakening” when he watched former Vice President Al Gore’s environmental documentary ‘‘An Inconvenient Truth.”

    “Fortunetellers, Soothsayers, Doomsayers, Climate Forecasters, all illegal in Maryland”
    http://pathstoknowledge.net/2009/08/28/fortuntellers-soothsayers-doomsayers-climate-forecasters-all-illegal-in-maryland/

    So now Al Gore has not just broken the Law of Maryland by Soothsaying Doomsday with his movie but one can rationally argue he’s contributed to the delinquency of a person in a very serious way with that very same movie resulting in the unfortunate incident at the Discovery Channel offices in Maryland.

    Our words do matter.

  290. Tim Clark says:

    It sure looks to me that Keith Oberman helped him compose the manifesto.

  291. Vince Causey says:

    Chris Winter says:

    “How could they believe “solving AGW is simple and painless” when even the first-step measures (like the Kyoto Protocol) are derided by so many voices — mostly of the Republican persuasion — as disastrously punitive to the point of “destroying the economy”?

    Well Chris, I think you’ve just answered your own question. It is precisely because the public believe that AGW mitigation is being blocked by certain interest groups – Republicans, Big Oil etc – that they perceive it to be no more than a political battle. If this is in doubt, a recent poll suggested an absurdly low level of understanding of what actions individuals need to take to mitigate against climate change. On average, the more ‘green’ the respondent, the more clueless they were; most thought that actions such as changing light bulbs and unplugging appliances from the wall were sufficient.

    So, yes, there is a huge disconnect between what the public believe they need to do, and what they would actually have to do to mitigate against CO2 emissions (I won’t say mitigate against climate change because that is a nonsense).

  292. John Whitman says:

    pwl says:
    September 2, 2010 at 11:19 am

    So now Al Gore has not just broken the Law of Maryland by Soothsaying Doomsday with his movie but one can rationally argue he’s contributed to the delinquency of a person in a very serious way with that very same movie resulting in the unfortunate incident at the Discovery Channel offices in Maryland.

    —————–

    pwl,

    And it seems possible that old AG has contributed somewhat to the delinquency of several masseuses too. ; )

    John

  293. Gail Combs says:

    JimF says:
    September 1, 2010 at 9:47 pm
    …..Yes, because that would have been a real improvement over the number of people killed or injured in horse- and oxcart-related accidents…
    _________________________________________________________-
    You are correct.

    According to renowned trainer John Lyons, the horse is the most dangerous animal to humans. At the seminar I was at he asked how many had been injured by a horse – everyone raised their hands. He then asked how many knew someone who was killed by a horse – one third to one half of the hands were raised.

    These were all horse back riders. When you start talking carriages the possibility for accidents goes up tremendously because a runaway horse with a rider is not nearly as potentially fatal as a runaway horse pulling a carriage and wearing blinders. I have been through both experiences and was injured in the one carriage accident but never injured in the dozens of ridden runaways while retraining a very dumb ex-race horse.

    The though of going back to horse and carriage with all the “brain washed bambi lovers” trying to control ill-trained horses in a city setting….. Words fail

  294. Joel says:

    “How about the recent Republican attempt to end the estate tax? That would have cost the government close to a trillion dollars over ten years, while benefitting only the wealthiest 0.3 percent of Americans. Does that qualify as wealth redistribution? If not, why not?”

    Seriously? This is a question?

    It isn’t wealth REdistribution if the original owner of the wealth keeps it, or passes it on to those he names. Since you do see it as REdistribution of wealth to the wealthy, I take it that you believe that the Government actually owns all money and everything, and that by letting the rich keep it then the government is giving them money at the expense of the poor.

    This is a very wrong headed way to think about taxes and government.

  295. Chris Winter says:

    @Vince Causey:

    We could argue over polls until the Sun enters its red giant phase, and still the only light shed on the question would be that of the Sun. Especially when you don’t tell me which poll you refer to.

    If the public is misinformed, the obvious thing to to is to set them straight.

    You wrote: “So, yes, there is a huge disconnect between what the public believe they need to do, and what they would actually have to do to mitigate against CO2 emissions (I won’t say mitigate against climate change because that is a nonsense).”

    So then, you believe CO2 emissions have nothing to do with climate change? I think that’s incorrect.

  296. Djozar says:

    Chris Winter;

    “So then, you believe CO2 emissions have nothing to do with climate change? I think that’s incorrect.”

    Maybe. My problem with the concentration on the impact of CO2 is the degree of the said impact and ignoring other contributing factors to the climate. That’s why I get irrated at being called a “denier”; I’m not denying but I am skeptical that all the factors have been evaluated without political, emotional or religious hyperbole.

  297. CodeTech says:

    Chris Winter says:

    So then, you believe CO2 emissions have nothing to do with climate change? I think that’s incorrect.

    Yes, we know you do. Isn’t that the basis of the whole disagreement? “WE” think CO2 is plant food and beneficial in almost every way. “YOU” think CO2 is the doom and end of the planet. See the difference?

    This thread has actually been great… for identifying the next cadre of comment spammers/polluters…

    My favorite so far is the guy who thinks estate taxes are only a concern of “the rich” and that by not stealing that money from families the government is being robbed.

  298. James Sexton says:

    Chris Winter says:
    September 2, 2010 at 12:58 pm

    “So then, you believe CO2 emissions have nothing to do with climate change? I think that’s incorrect.”

    Sigh, this is why there is such a disconnect. The climate will change and always has changed with or without man-emitted CO2.

  299. L says:

    Yo, Duckster: Quack, quack, quack!

  300. Rob Honeycutt says:

    James Sexton… There is an important difference that I think you are missing. The Right to Life people we openly calling for the murder of people like Dr Tiller. No one discussing AGW is telling people to go out and commit murder. Most people I read are saying that this is a very concerning issue and we need to seriously look at market based solutions to avert a very unknown future if we continue on a “burn it all” trajectory.

  301. pablo an ex pat says:

    just a thought, if there is such a thing as a Euthansia Society would it be increasingly risky to attend meetings if you were a past president ?

  302. James Sexton says:

    Rob Honeycutt says:
    September 2, 2010 at 2:07 pm

    “There is an important difference that I think you are missing. The Right to Life people we openly calling for the murder of people like Dr Tiller.”

    I’d have to call bs on that one. You have proof of that? I know several right-to-lifers. None I know of have a violent bone in their bodies and we horrified at the murder of Dr. Tiller. So, you’re going to have to show me some proof on that. Or is that some propaganda you’re believing.

    [REPLY - This is getting a little too far astray. Wrap it up. ~ Evan]

  303. Rob Honeycutt says:

    James… There is a full wiki page on anti-abortion violence including a long string of murders, attempted murder, and bombings. I would not lay this at the feet of every Right-to-Lifer but I do believe this is where the language we use matters.

    Climate scientists, even climate activist, are not using the kind of rhetoric that suggests to anyone that they do anything other than understand the issue and look for viable solutions.

  304. Graeme says:

    Gail Combs says:
    September 2, 2010 at 5:15 am

    We are on the same page.

  305. Graeme says:

    James Sexton says:
    September 2, 2010 at 8:33 am

    Do you have a link – I couldn’t find the quote.

    Thanks.

  306. Steve in SC says:

    [snip OTT]

  307. Chris Winter says:

    James Sexton wrote: “Sigh, this is why there is such a disconnect. The climate will change and always has changed with or without man-emitted CO2.”

    Certainly it has, and will. And if we determine that it’s changing in harmful ways, we will at some point try to defend ourselves against that — just as we do with hurricanes, for example.

    On the subject of whether or not CO2 is involved, the evidence I see tells me it is. Those who think there’s another reason for the steadily rising temperatures have yet to show me any convincing evidence.

  308. Chris Winter says:

    CodeTech wrote: “Yes, we know you do. Isn’t that the basis of the whole disagreement? “WE” think CO2 is plant food and beneficial in almost every way. “YOU” think CO2 is the doom and end of the planet. See the difference?

    This thread has actually been great… for identifying the next cadre of comment spammers/polluters…”

    Yes, I see the difference between us. YOU think everyone who disagrees with you in any fashion is a misguided fearmonger who must be ridiculed. I think you misunderstand some science.

  309. Gail Combs says:

    Rob Honeycutt says:
    September 2, 2010 at 8:47 am

    Anthony, I really don’t understand why you are choosing to trumpet James Lee as some kind of example of the left. This has far more to do with the mental stability of one individual than any given issue…..
    _______________________________________________
    I think the reason for this post is explained fully by James Sexton comment:

    I think this serves to illustrate many of the points attempting to be made here. I find this absolutely astonishing, ——-from another site,

    “ellielight

    “When the earth is under attack, it takes a brave, principled hero to stand up for what is right. James Jay Lee was such a person. His desparation can be traced directly back to George Bush’s violent siege against the environment. I just wish Mr. Lee would have been more patient because Obama and the Democrats are completely on his side and were in the process of fulfilling his mandate. After the elctions, the Democrats WILL pass a set of environmental regulations that will begin reversing the damage cause by the Republicans and right wing money grabbers / planet rapers.””

    “Some of the warmistas will see this man as a hero and a martyr. That is the point”

  310. Chris Winter says:

    Joel wrote: “It isn’t wealth REdistribution if the original owner of the wealth keeps it, or passes it on to those he names. Since you do see it as REdistribution of wealth to the wealthy, I take it that you believe that the Government actually owns all money and everything, and that by letting the rich keep it then the government is giving them money at the expense of the poor.

    This is a very wrong headed way to think about taxes and government.”

    As long as there is any sort of government, taxes will be assessed to pay for it. Since rich and poor alike depend on certain government services, wealth redistribution by means of taxation will always be going on.

    The only question, therefore, is what sort of tax structure is fairest. But this whole discussion is OT, so we will probably have to agree to disagree.

  311. Sean Peake says:

    Chris Winter:
    On the subject of whether or not CO2 is involved, the evidence I see tells me it is. Those who think there’s another reason for the steadily rising temperatures have yet to show me any convincing evidence
    —————————
    Puleeze. All the evidence… what, pray tell, is that unassailable, verifiable, peer reviewed and scientifically verified (i.e. no computer modeled scenarios) have you seen?

  312. Smokey says:

    Chris Winter says:

    “On the subject of whether or not CO2 is involved, the evidence I see tells me it is.”

    Please cite your evidence.

    Next, you say:

    “Those who think there’s another reason for the steadily rising temperatures have yet to show me any convincing evidence.”

    You’re new here, Chris, so let me explain. Those proposing a hypothesis, such as: an increase in human-emitted CO2 will cause catastrophic anthropogenic global warming [CO2=CAGW], have the burden of showing that their hypothesis explains reality better than the long-accepted null hypothesis, which says that the climate has always fluctuated in the past the way it is fluctuating now; nothing unusual is occurring.

    Scientific skeptics [the only honest kind of scientists] need prove nothing. The burden is entirely on those proposing their new hypothesis.

    The job of skeptics is to falsify proposed hypotheses. First, what are the real world observations? As you can see, the planet is emerging from the LIA. Nothing unusual is happening. And CO2 has such a negligible effect that it can be completely disregarded for all practical purposes; the UN/IPCC is wrong.

    Now that you’ve had a primer on the Scientific Method, do you accept it? Or will you fall back on an emotional reaction, rejecting the Scientific Method to satisfy your belief in the bizarre notion that an atmosphere with a composition of non-CO2 gases of 99.97% is good — but one with 99.94% of non-CO2 gases will lead to runaway global warming and climate catastrophe? Keep in mind that there is no empirical [real world], testable evidence supporting that conjecture. None.

    Now that you understand that the “convincing evidence” must be provided to skeptics by the purveyors of the CO2=CAGW hypothesis… where is the evidence?

    Take your time.

  313. Rob Honeycutt says:

    Gail Combs… Anyone who holds James Lee up as a positive example is misguided in the extreme.

    But I stand by my previous statements that climate scientists do not use rhetoric that promotes or in any way incites anyone to this kind of action.

  314. kadaka (KD Knoebel) says:

    From: Chris Winter on September 2, 2010 at 5:31 pm

    On the subject of whether or not CO2 is involved, the evidence I see tells me it is. Those who think there’s another reason for the steadily rising temperatures have yet to show me any convincing evidence.

    What steadily rising temperatures?

    You must have missed the BBC Q&A with the esteemed Professor Phil Jones of University of East Anglia’s Climactic Research Unit (CRU), back at February 13, 2010. He agreed there’s been no statistically-significant warming from 1995 to the present. From January 2002 to the present there is a negative trend (indicating global cooling) but it’s not statistically significant.

    There are also distinct periods of warming. 1860 to 1880, 1910 to 1940, and 1975 to 1998 all have similar rates of warming that are not statistically different from each other, and you can toss 1975 to 2009 in that group as well.

    The global temperatures are not steadily rising.

  315. James Sexton says:

    Chris Winter says:
    September 2, 2010 at 5:31 pm

    James Sexton wrote: “Sigh, this is why there is such a disconnect. The climate will change and always has changed with or without man-emitted CO2.”

    Certainly it has, and will. And if we determine that it’s changing in harmful ways, we will at some point try to defend ourselves against that — just as we do with hurricanes, for example.

    On the subject of whether or not CO2 is involved, the evidence I see tells me it is. Those who think there’s another reason for the steadily rising temperatures have yet to show me any convincing evidence.
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    The climate changes. Apparently we can agree on that. If at some point, the climate works in our favor, we do nothing, but if it doesn’t, we should do something? Uhmm, but it always changes. Do you actually believe we can stop the climate from changing? As far as the CO2 goes, there hasn’t been a shred of evidence that it is effecting any change at all. If you can show me it is, please do. Better, please show me how man emitted CO2 effects the climate. More, please show me how it adversely effects the climate.

    Sis, history is replete with examples of how mankind thrives better in a warmer climate. Even if the minuscule amount of extra CO2 we put in the atmosphere causes the earth to be warmer, it would be a good thing.

  316. tallbloke says:

    Dr A Burns says:
    September 1, 2010 at 1:50 pm

    I wonder why he rates “Squirrels” above kangaroos and koalas … the latter didn’t even make it to his list.

    Yeah, and how come ‘froggies’ get an exemption. What did Lee like about the cheese eating surrender monkeys?

  317. Leo Norekens says:

    @Chris Winter (September 2, 2010 at 8:42 am)
    “The bullets come from the left. — Quote that to the family of Dr. George Tiller and see what response you get.”

    Well you’re right. Thats’ the one exception that I know.
    Let me rephrase that: The bullets come from the people who do not believe in the freedom of men to make their own choices and live according to them, and who therefore prefer to impose their own ‘universal truths’ on others, i.e.
    1. the radical left
    2. religious fanatics

  318. Pascvaks says:

    Ref – Leo Norekens says:
    September 3, 2010 at 3:28 am
    @Chris Winter (September 2, 2010 at 8:42 am)

    Bullets come from everywhere.

  319. Some of the replies to me above make valid points. But now Anthony has posted a couple more articles about the incident, falling into the familiar trap of shrill accusations of extremism which characterize American politics. This site’s readers you would expect to be suspicious of government-funded pseudo-science, but this post contains a press release from the ‘National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism’ as if ‘terrorism’ has an agreed, neutral definition and which can be ‘studied':
    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/09/02/um-report-labels-discovery-channel-incident-environmentally-inspired-suicide-eco-terrorism/

    Obviously, the definition of ‘terrorism’ is entirely political – it doesn’t even have to involve violence. Environmentalists have been put away for decades for non-violent acts of ‘eco-terrorism’ against property.

  320. E.M.Smith says:

    I know, I’m late to this topic… But the stock markets were doing flip flops and that’s when I have to focus on them to eat next month…

    So, at any rate, I’d wondered what this guy was ‘demanding’. The MSM was just saying he “had demands” and being silent about what. Now I know why. Thanks. Were it not for this article I’d likely never have found out.

  321. Chris Winter says:

    @Smokey (September 2, 2010 at 6:29 pm)

    Well, you show me three JPEGs and a PNG. They’re real purty, but are they valid evidence? I have no idea, since I don’t know their provenance. OK, make that little idea, because the first has Joanne Nova’s name on it. I’ve seen some of the work she supports, and I tend to discount it.

    But if you, or whoever came up with those four images, think they disprove what you call CAGW, I suggest they be written up in a scientific paper and submitted to some reputable journal. Think of the potential rewards, as a grateful world wakes from the nightmare prospect of having to deal with a wrecked climate and can carry on with business as usual.

    You write that “Scientific skeptics [the only honest kind of scientists] need prove nothing.” Perhaps that attitude explains why no one has yet proven to the larger world that the 26 Gigatons of CO2 humans emit each year are nothing to worry about.

    You advise me to take my time. I don’t need much time at all. I know that, in the several years of WUWT’s existence, many visitors have posted links to evidence that supports the mainstream view of climate science. That abundant evidence is still out there for the looking, at sites like Skeptical Science. Experience tells me that requests like yours and James Sexton’s are made just to get me to shut up and go away. I may well go away. Reality, however, will not.

  322. Chris Winter says:

    @James Sexton:

    In fact, I do believe that the CO2 humans emit causes warming, and that with enough political will we could turn that around. But I meant that we would defend ourselves against the results of warming, for example by building walls against the rising seas. You seem to have missed that point.

  323. DirkH says:

    Rob Honeycutt says:
    September 2, 2010 at 6:59 pm
    “Gail Combs… Anyone who holds James Lee up as a positive example is misguided in the extreme.

    But I stand by my previous statements that climate scientists do not use rhetoric that promotes or in any way incites anyone to this kind of action.”

    Maybe it escaped your attention that Dr. James Hansen endorses a book by a Mr. Farnish that calls for the wholesale dismantling of technological civilization. Mr. Farnish is of the opinion that … well, these are his own words:
    “I am not going to dwell on the numerous methods of sabotage open to those who have the motivation and the means to carry them out – those people (of which you may be one of) are almost certainly far better equipped than me, and also know how to do it far more effectively and secretively than I could outline in a book of this nature – but I will reiterate what I think are the four key rules of sabotage, should you chose to take that path alongside the other things I have suggested in this chapter:

    1. Carefully weigh up all the pros and cons, and then ask yourself, “Is it worth it?”

    2. Plan ahead, and plan well, accounting for every possible eventuality.

    3. Even if you understand the worth of your action, don’t get caught.

    4. Make the Tools of Disconnection your priority; anything else is a waste of time and effort.


    Here are some links:
    http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100102162045AAGltdl

    The online version of Mr. Farnish’s book:
    http://www.farnish.plus.com/amatterofscale/index.htm

    The stuff i quoted comes from this chapter:
    http://www.farnish.plus.com/amatterofscale/chapter16.htm

    So, yes, some climate scientists do endorse violence.

  324. DirkH says:

    @Rob Honeycutt :

    I should add that Mr. Farnish explicitly includes the possibility of “removing” dams in his sabotage recommendations:
    http://joannenova.com.au/2010/01/hanson-barracking-for-lawless-destruction-and-the-end-of-civilization/
    “For instance, if all the evidence you have to hand suggests that removing a sea wall or a dam will have a net beneficial effect on the natural environment then, however you go about it – explosives, technical sabotage or manual destruction – the removal would be a constructive action. If this action was fuelled by anger then your use of explosives involved Constructive Anger.”

  325. Smokey says:

    Chris Winter says:

    “On the subject of whether or not CO2 is involved, the evidence I see tells me it is.”

    What “evidence”?? Recall that I asked: Please cite your evidence. But no evidence has been forthcoming, only vague hand-waving toward climate pal review and un-named journals. Neither is evidence.

    You say: “Well, you show me three JPEGs and a PNG. They’re real purty, but are they valid evidence? I have no idea, since I don’t know their provenance.”

    All you had to do was look. One of the sources was from TonyB. The others, if you had bothered to look at the charts or the address bar, were from the IPCC, from Data Analytics, from Icecap, and from arch-alarmist Phil Jones, whose name is right there in the graph. But your mind is made up, and you can not tolerate viewing contrary facts.

    You can’t look at evidence that debunks CAGW, even from Phil Jones. Your mind is made up, and objective facts do not matter. We see that type of cognitive dissonance expressed here all the time by CAGW believers. It is the same cognitive dissonance that makes alarmist blogs into echo chambers, with no uncomfortable facts allowed.

    I’m still waiting for that “evidence” you claim to have. Vague referrals to the climate pal review system, and hand-waving toward un-named journals doesn’t pass muster here. Empirical facts are what matter. Everything else is just conjecture based on belief.

  326. Vince Causey says:

    Chris Winter;

    “So then, you believe CO2 emissions have nothing to do with climate change? I think that’s incorrect.”

    Even allowing the IPCC climate sensitivities, short of closing down the global economies, tweaking CO2 emissions won’t change the climatic outcome at all. That is my point.

    However, I do believe that CO2 sensitivities have been over hyped, while the hype over the consequences are off the scale.

    Unlike yourself, who have yet to provide any reasons for believing in CAGW, here are a brief list of my reasons for being sceptical.

    1) Hansen et al have predicted an Ocean Heat anomaly which has not yet been found. According to Trenbeth, half the expected heat cannot be found. Yet how can this be consistent with the premise of a radiative imalance of nearly 1 watt per square meter?

    2) The coupled climate models predict a hotspt in the tropical mid troposphere that so far has also eluded discovery.

    3) There has been no statistically significant warming since 1995.

    4) IPCC predicted outcomes are based on positive feedbacks being programmed into the models for which there is no real world evidence.

    5) The reason for believing that CO2 is the major climate forcer is because without the CO2 forcings (and the attendant feedbacks), the models cannot hindcast the twentieth century warming. This is an argumentum ad ignorantium, especially since many of the forcings are have a low level of scientific understanding (IPCC AR4).

  327. Vince Causey says:

    I accidently pressed enter before finishing my list:
    6) The standard AGW model believes that CO2 induced warming leads to reduced cloud cover resulting in positive feedback, but Dr Spencer has written a paper based on the hypothesis that the IPCC have got it completely backwards. He believes that it is the reduced cloud cover that causes the warming.
    7) Actual surface temperature records have suspect quality and do not adequately allow for local heating effects, as shown by Dr Pielke.
    8) Natural climate change that has occurred for millenia adequately accounts for modern warming.
    9) Lindzen and Choi have cast doubt on the assertion that the ERBE satellite data shows stratospheric cooling.

    So, until I see some convincing evidence, I will remain a sceptic.

  328. Robert in Calgary says:

    Chris Winter says……

    “Experience tells me that requests like yours (Smokey’s) and James Sexton’s are made just to get me to shut up and go away.”

    Come on Chris! Smokey gave you a very simple challenge. Stop being a coward, either you can back up your claims or you can’t. Which is it?

  329. Dave F says:

    Pascvaks says:
    September 2, 2010 at 8:01 am

    …I have no doubt that one day soon some “science” person with a PhD in something is going to find a way, based on a computer model, to identify…

    It will be a brave new world, for sure.

  330. Chris Winter says:

    Djozar wrote: “Maybe. My problem with the concentration on the impact of CO2 is the degree of the said impact and ignoring other contributing factors to the climate.”

    You’re right that CO2 is not the sole cause. Land use changes play a part; I’ve read that they may be 20 percent responsible. And carbon soot does a little. But I think CO2 is the major contributor right now.

  331. Smokey says:

    Chris Winter says:

    “I think CO2 is the major contributor right now.”

    Facts, Chris. Give us empirical evidence to discuss! This isn’t Joe Romm’s blog. Unsupported conjecture isn’t worth spit.

  332. Chris Winter says:

    Smokey wrote: “What “evidence”?? Recall that I asked: Please cite your evidence. But no evidence has been forthcoming, only vague hand-waving toward climate pal review and un-named journals. Neither is evidence.

    You say: “Well, you show me three JPEGs and a PNG. They’re real purty, but are they valid evidence? I have no idea, since I don’t know their provenance.”

    All you had to do was look. One of the sources was from TonyB. The others, if you had bothered to look at the charts or the address bar, were from the IPCC, from Data Analytics, from Icecap, and from arch-alarmist Phil Jones, whose name is right there in the graph. But your mind is made up, and you can not tolerate viewing contrary facts.

    You can’t look at evidence that debunks CAGW, even from Phil Jones. Your mind is made up, and objective facts do not matter. We see that type of cognitive dissonance expressed here all the time by CAGW believers. It is the same cognitive dissonance that makes alarmist blogs into echo chambers, with no uncomfortable facts allowed.

    I’m still waiting for that “evidence” you claim to have. Vague referrals to the climate pal review system, and hand-waving toward un-named journals doesn’t pass muster here. Empirical facts are what matter. Everything else is just conjecture based on belief.”

    I don’t know who TonyB is, or Data Analytics (unless that’s Gene Zeien). Here’s what I learned from looking at those graphs a second time, and tracing their URLs (excuse the repetition):

    One is from Joanne Nova’s site. When I typed in the Hadley URL at the bottom of the image, I got a notice saying I was about to download an application/octet stream. I canceled that, since I don’t know how to handle it.

    Two displays no indication of where it came from. But backtracking the URL, I walked through the various pages of Gene Zeien’s “Justdata” site. He’s doing interesting work, but I can’t come to any conclusion about it without doing a lot more work than I have time for right now.

    Third is a plot of USHCN (Historical Climate Network) versus CO2 concentration. Just eyeballing it, I see what looks like a slight but definite upward trend from 1895 through about 1970. After that there appears to be an inflection point, following which the upward trend becomes steeper. It’s interesting that CO2 increase becomes steeper after this inflection point, although the transition is not abrupt.

    Fourth seems to have something do with temperature station siting error or UHI. Aside from that, I can’t decipher what it’s supposed to show.

    To summarize, the only conclusion about climate change I derived from this lesson is that there’s an upward trend to temperature which increases about 1970.

    About my evidence: I gather that if I don’t provide or cite any, I’m a blowhard without a case, and if I do point to Web sites or journals that support the mainstream view, those are inadmissible because they are mainstream. This makes it hard to know how to proceed.

  333. Chris Winter says:

    Vince Causey wrote: “Even allowing the IPCC climate sensitivities, short of closing down the global economies, tweaking CO2 emissions won’t change the climatic outcome at all. That is my point.”

    From this I infer that you see no possibility of deploying clean energy sources in time. Here we disagree, though I grant it will take years and be expensive.

    “However, I do believe that CO2 sensitivities have been over hyped, while the hype over the consequences [is] off the scale.

    Unlike yourself, who have yet to provide any reasons for believing in CAGW, here are a brief list of my reasons for being sceptical.

    1) Hansen et al have predicted an Ocean Heat anomaly which has not yet been found. According to Trenbeth, half the expected heat cannot be found. Yet how can this be consistent with the premise of a radiative imbalance of nearly 1 watt per square meter?”

    Do you have a cite for that Hansen et. al. paper? I can look it up, but a cite would save me time. As for Trenbeth’s missing heat, does this come from the CRU e-mails? AFAIK that claim has been debunked.

    “2) The coupled climate models predict a hotspot in the tropical mid-troposphere that so far has also eluded discovery.”

    I thought you skeptics held that climate models are inherently worthless.

    “3) There has been no statistically significant warming since 1995.”

    This I know comes from Phil Jones’s BBC interview back in February. It’s clear that the interviewer picked 1995 as the earliest year for which Jones would answer that way. Jones has since set the record straight.

    “4) IPCC predicted outcomes are based on positive feedbacks being programmed into the models for which there is no real world evidence.”

    Again — models? People here keep saying they are no evidence of anything.

    “5) The reason for believing that CO2 is the major climate forcer is because without the CO2 forcings (and the attendant feedbacks), the models cannot hindcast the twentieth century warming. This is an argumentum ad ignorantium, especially since many of the forcings are have a low level of scientific understanding (IPCC AR4).

    I know this is true for CO2 forcing, calculated from century-old physics. I don’t know that the feedbacks are folded in.

    Regarding the current observed warming, the calculated CO2 forcing is the largest factor. Land use is 20 percent AIUI. Black carbon is a smaller amount. The Sun would be important if its output were increasing right now, but measurements show it is not.

    “6) The standard AGW model believes that CO2 induced warming leads to reduced cloud cover resulting in positive feedback, but Dr Spencer has written a paper based on the hypothesis that the IPCC have got it completely backwards. He believes that it is the reduced cloud cover that causes the warming.”

    If true, this cannot explain why nights have warmed more than days, or polar regions with less direct sunlight angles have warmed faster than temperate latitudes.

    “7) Actual surface temperature records have suspect quality and do not adequately allow for local heating effects, as shown by Dr Pielke.”

    I don’t believe this claim.

    “8) Natural climate change that has occurred for millennia adequately accounts for modern warming.”

    Not if the recent warming has increased in step with CO2 emissions, as the data show it has.

    “9) Lindzen and Choi have cast doubt on the assertion that the ERBE satellite data shows stratospheric cooling.”

    I believe this is a long-debunked paper.

  334. Gnomish says:

    CO2 is how to touch Gaia’s G-spot. If you touch her there, she will tip right over and have an immediate climate, losing all semblance of self control. Robert Palmer has a song about it.

  335. Chris Winter says:

    Robert in Calgary wrote: “Come on Chris! Smokey gave you a very simple challenge. Stop being a coward, either you can back up your claims or you can’t. Which is it?”

    I’ve played this game before. Any effort I made to meet that simple challenge would be found to be insufficient. Data would be disbelieved or disregarded. Links would be deemed suspect because they are part of “the climate pal review system.”

    I actually do believe understanding the reality of climate change is a fairly simple matter. Scientists have been working at it long enough, after all. Of course, anyone who thinks the scientists are making it all up won’t agree. But I have little to say to such a person, except to advise that they stop using the products based on such fraudulent science.

    As far as challenges go, I too have issued one. In fact, it dates from long before I chimed in on this dispute; I am merely reminding people here of its existence. I doubt that anyone will step up and claim the prize for meeting that challenge, enormous though it would be for anyone who could prove AGW was not a problem.

  336. Smokey says:

    Chris Winter says:

    “Any effort I made to meet that simple challenge would be found to be insufficient. Data would be disbelieved or disregarded. Links would be deemed suspect…”

    That is exactly the excuse you’re using to hand-wave away the charts I provided for you, when I asked you to provide empirical evidence backing your belief in the CO2=CAGW conjecture; it’s psychological projection accusing others of what you are doing. It’s a tactic, and the alarmist crowd uses it all the time. I even provided a chart made by Phil Jones — and you attacked your Joanne Nova strawman instead of discussing Jones’ chart.

    I’m not interested in educating anyone who pretends to have verifiable, testable facts, but who won’t produce them. So I suggest reading the WUWT archives. You can get up to speed that way, and with any luck the scales will fall from your eyes.

    Nit-picking every chart provided shows a closed mind. Another occasional refugee from RealClimate used the same tactic every time I posted a chart, trying to explain why each one was insufficient for one reason or another. Last time he pulled that stunt I gave him fifty charts refuting his position. What happened? His cognitive dissonance forced him to reject all 50 charts!

    If you are a True Believer in the repeatedly debunked CO2=CAGW conjecture, or in Michael Mann’s debunked hokey stick chart, where he claimed there was no MWP, no LIA, nothing but an unchanging climate for a thousand years [the hockey stick handle], then there is nothing I can do for you, any more than I could convince Mrs Keech’s acolytes that there are no flying saucers, or Jehovah’s Witnesses that the end is not really nigh.

    But if you think you have an open mind, then look at what the charts say, and don’t worry too much about who posted them. Most of the attribution is in the charts or the address anyway. And FYI, here are those 50 charts:

    click1
    click2
    click3
    click4
    click5
    click6
    click7
    click8
    click9
    click10
    click11
    click12
    click13
    click14
    click15
    click16
    click17
    click18
    click19
    click20
    click21
    click22
    click23
    click24
    click25
    click26
    click27
    click28
    click29
    click30
    click31
    click32
    click33
    click34
    click35
    click36
    click37
    click38
    click39
    click40

    click41
    click42
    click43
    click44
    click45
    click46
    click47
    click48
    click49
    click50

  337. Robert in Calgary says:

    Chris Winter, a mighty keyboard warrior. He’s played the game before.

  338. Matt says:

    Gosh. Mr Lee seems to blame filthy humans and their filthy religions for everything.

    Atheists often smugly point to the fact that: “There are never any atheists committing acts of terrorism, are there?”

    Mr Lee says there are. He was the first, there will -sadly- be more.

  339. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/theblotter/2012903380_appellate_court_overturns_conv.html

    As if to confirm my comments above about the political nature of the term ‘terrorist’, this story is about a non-violent environmental activist wrongly imprisoned – but her conviction has been overturned because the judge used the t-word. I’m disappointed that some climate skeptics fall into the same trap.

  340. PhilJourdan says:

    As if to confirm my comments above about the political nature of the term ‘terrorist’, this story is about a non-violent environmental activist wrongly imprisoned – but her conviction has been overturned because the judge used the t-word. I’m disappointed that some climate skeptics fall into the same trap.

    Non-violent? 2 counts of arson are “non-violent”? You have a weird dictionary.

    Besides, the the case was remanded due to errors. The evidence was not thrown out.

  341. @PhilJourdan – Yes, arson when there is no danger to people is non-violent. Violence does not mean harming inanimate objects.

Comments are closed.