LA Times invokes Godwins Law, cites ‘Mein Kampf’ to attack Heartland Institute

From JunkScience.com LATimes cites ‘Mein Kampf’ to attack Heartland

The Los Angeles Times invokes der Führer to attack Heartland.

The Los Angeles Times editorializes:

Leaked documents from the Heartland Institute in Chicago, one of many nonprofits that spread disinformation about climate science in hopes of stalling government action to combat global warming, reveal that the organization is working on a curriculum for public schools that casts doubt on the work of climatologists worldwide. Heartland officials say one of the documents was a fake, but the curriculum plans were reportedly discussed in more than one. According to the New York Times, the curriculum would claim, among other things, that “whether humans are changing the climate is a major scientific controversy.”

That is a lie so big that, to quote from “Mein Kampf,” it would be hard for most people to believe that anyone “could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously”…

 

Here’s the story link:

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/opinionla/la-ed-climate-20120220,0,3564279.story

Now is the time for all good men (and women) to cancel their subscriptions and fire off scathing letters to the editor about this ugly and uncalled for comparision. Most textbooks are written by private companies, and I can tell you that as a former school board member they don’t give you a lot of options since the state now issues “approved” textbook lists that you are only allowed to choose from. Local teachers and school boards can easily reject any materials they don’t want. Approving materials they do want is an uphill battle.

Here’s the feedback page:

http://www.latimes.com/about/mediagroup/la-mediagroup-contactus,0,7698150.htmlstory

h/t to Steve Milloy

About these ads

124 thoughts on “LA Times invokes Godwins Law, cites ‘Mein Kampf’ to attack Heartland Institute

  1. Michael Mann’s hockey stick graph has been “validated repeatedly”? I can only assume the Los Angeles Times editorial writers aren’t paying any attention to the global warming debate at all.

  2. What an incredibly bizarre quote. That Hitler quote was issued to support their claim, not impugn yours. So the LA Times likened themselves to Hitler.

  3. The LA times obviously know things about climate that nobody else knows.
    This is an outragious piece of journalism and will backfire on them for sure.

  4. The L.A. Times has been on the forefront of climate fear bias for decades. It is a case of don’t bother with the facts just push the alarmist propaganda. The fact that global temperatures have been at a standstill for 15 years when climate models say these temperatures should have been rapidly climbing because of ever rising atmospheric CO2 levels is ignored. All the Times wants people to see is what the flawed models project. This approach by the Times simply and clearly shows their efforts are driven by politics not science.

  5. So let’s see, we are either “deniers” in comparison to those who deny the Holocaust or we are to accept a description of our activities by the purpetrators of the Holocaust. The irony of it all.

    I guess it is good when the LA Times can allow itself to see both sides of an issue /sarc.

  6. They quote Hitler to illustrate their case? That’s an original approach, to say the least!
    As to the so-called “Godwin’s law” — it is not a law, and it doesn’t exist.
    Life is not a game, and history should be remembered.

  7. “According to the New York Times…”

    Let’s see, the “leaked” documents are available all over the web, so the LA Times decides to reference as its source…another news outlet? Now that is what I call quality journalism.

  8. HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! LA Times going down in flames right along with their ideology manifested in the form of CAGW! Goodbye, you communist Malthusian misanthropists.

  9. I’m going to read up on PT Barnum’s philosophy of life. Maybe I’ll find some answers on how to cope with so much apparent stupidity in the MSM.

    I’m not a conspiracy theorist. I just think that maybe it’s because of our collective preference for style over substance, which results in air heads dominating the media.

    But, the medium is the message.( Thanks Marsh.)

    So, what’s the excuse for editorial stupidity in the print media. Advertising? TV News Anchor aspirations?

    Beats me.

  10. Did you see the picture they use for the editorial? “A section of the ice sheet covering much of Greenland is seen in this 2005 aerial photo.” I didn’t know Greenland was an ocean.

  11. Correction to the WUWT headline: The LA times did not invoke Godwin’s Law – they made themselves a subject of it. The invoked a slur based on the Nazi propaganda methods.

    Then they employed them. Twofer!

  12. Could it be any more perfect!

    When Hitler said that he was referring to what he called “The Big Lie” that Ludendorff was responsible for losing WWI and accused the Jews of being the liars to throw off there own guilt in being responsible for Germany’s troubles. In fact is was Ludendorff that was largely responsible for losing WWI by advocating submarine warfare which helped bring the US into the war and logistical mistakes which caused heavy losses from un-reinforced offensive maneuvers. Therefore, the accusation of the “Big Lie” was the real lie that helped lead Germany down the path of WWII and the Holocaust.

    How fitting that the LA Times have cast themselves as the false accuser for political gain.

  13. The LA Times and the Heartland Institute alike have a duty to “Be First with the Truth“.

    It is both legally and literally the case that lawyers and judges do NOT share that same duty to truth … lawyers being duty-bound to their clients (even clients who are guilty), and judges being duty-bound to the law (even laws that are unjust).

    That is why a bedrock and constitutionally protected principle of American-style democracy is that lawyers and judges alike are forbidden to control the public dialog.

    The Heartland Institute now is seeking to delegate responsibility for truth to its lawyers … and *that* is a decision that reflects seriously bad judgment and a profound dereliction of duty on the part of the Heartland Institute.

  14. These people are bent. The dog whistle for their cult is worn out (from overuse) and they are desperately seeking approval and acceptance and/or a way out. Some are so heavily invested in AGW, like this author, that they have become progressively more desperate (pun intended). Many “journalists” have indeed used the name-calling hammer so often they are now unable to now recant without getting trampled by the herd from both sides. They are forced by circumstance to do a slow but steady mea culpa. Should provide no small bit of entertainment for the non-AGW crowd. They deserve it and we deserve it, enjoy.

  15. Anthony,
    Why does this surprise you? cAGW-Global warming is not and has never been a scientific movement. It is a fascist-socialist movement. “Science” was an arbitrary irrelevant means to the end. As talented, literate individuals like you take away the means the wretched rhetoric of totalitarian despotism just becomes more apparent; it was always there.

  16. Hmm. Their link claiming “repeated validation” goes to this Guardian article – which, er, claims “Has it been disproved? Despite all the efforts, no. So far, it has survived the ultimate scientific test of repeated replication.”. Well, you get repeated claims of repeated validation, anyway. The echo chamber at its “best”.

    To be fair, I don’t trust anything with “Times” in its name these days.

  17. A physicist,

    Just to be clear, The United States of America is not a democracy as you improperly stated, it is a republic. The idea that The United States of America is a democracy is something that else that is being falesly impressed upon our children, and apparently someone that is labeled as a physicist….

  18. OH, I see what they did there. It’s a Reverse Godwin. If the first person to accuse their opponent of being a Nazi looses the argument, Then the first to accuse THEMSELVES of being Nazis (by quoting ‘Mein Kampf’, for instance) makes their opponent loose.

  19. This is the same newspaper that obtained and then refused to release the video of Obama attending and speaking at the farewell dinner for Rashid Khalidi.

    They have zero journalistic integrity.

  20. To compare in any way Hitler and National Socialism to Heartland Institute simply beggars belief. If that is not libel I don’t know what is.

  21. Cancel our subscriptions???

    Since when are WUWT readers such idiots as to get their news from the L.A. “Grimes” (as L. Ron Hubbard called them in “Battlefield Earth) or similar newsrags?

    We don’t have subscriptions to cancel!

  22. @ Urederra:

    “Godwin’s law” might exist in the imagination of the people living in the fantasy world of computer games (such as Wikipedia editors) but not in real life. Get over it.

  23. This article claims that Mann’s hockey stick has been “repeatedly validated” and backs this with a reference to a recent Gardian publication of an interview with Michael Mann! Mann on Mann; must be gospel!!

  24. spread disinformation……

    I supposed just stating that the science is not settled….would fall into that category

    Sad truth is…as less and less people believe…..it will leave only the true nut jobs

  25. From what I posted on their website:
    I am a native of California and currently live in South Carolina where I am employed as an Environmental Science educator in the public school system. I also have 23 years of experience in environmental consulting.

    Without getting into the science that was mentioned in this article, the research put into writing it seems minimal and merely a parroting of alarmist ideology that was used in the faked document. The “Mein Kampf” reference is disturbing and uncalled for.

    The curriculum being developed is very different from the language you used. It merely strives to ensure that both sides are presented. If you are going to get upset about what the Heartland Institute is developing, then you should divert your energies to what already exists in our textbooks. From our textbook (Environmental Science published by Holt Rinehart & Winston) and used nationwide:

    “However, not all scientists agree that the observed global warming is due to greenhouse gases. Some scientists believe that the warming is part of natural climatic variability. They point out that widespread fluctuations in temperature have occurred throughout geologic time.”

    And, from the College Board AP Environmental Science Workshop Materials:

    “In contrast, global warming is a much more controversial and speculative phenomenon that possibly could result from increasing atmospheric concentrations of certain radiatively active trace gases. Moreover, some of the dire environmental consequencesof global warming—such as rising ocean levels, coastal flooding, ecosystem shifts, crop failures, increased severe weather, floods, and droughts—are even more uncertain and depend on the accuracy of complex computer models to predict future weather and climate. Whereas implications of the greenhouse effect can be determined directly from fundamental scientific principles, environmental scenarios predicted for global warming are subject to the limitations of stochastic models which, as critics point out, cannot be relied upon to predict the weather a week in advance, let alone several decades in the future. This is not to say that the predictions of such models are incorrect, only that one should recognize that the conclusions carry with them much more scientific uncertainty than those of global warming itself. Understanding this difference in predictability is of interest to everyone but especially important for the environmental science student.”

  26. Joe Ryan says:
    February 20, 2012 at 8:40 am
    What an incredibly bizarre quote. That Hitler quote was issued to support their claim, not impugn yours. So the LA Times likened themselves to Hitler.

    If memory serves, & I have not actually read Mine Kamf, that great philanthorpist, Adolf Hitler, said “The mass of the people are more likely to believe a big lie rather than a small one!” Primarily ths was because of Hilter’s contempt for the intelligence of Mr & Mrs Average in Germany. Not particularly flattering either way! Whatever way you look at it, they’ve stepped in the brown smelly stuff & have nowhere to wipe it off! Making comparisons such as this is the lowest of the low.

  27. So they want kids to be taught that there are no views other than the infamously ‘settled science’?

    I’d suggest the flag of the New EcoFriendly Sustainable World Order should be 4 black hockeysticks pointing outwards from a common centre to the points of the compass and curving the same way, within a white circle within a red background.

    But that would be stooping to their level, and there goes Godwin again….

  28. Myself when young did eagerly frequent
    Doctor and Saint, and even heard great Argument
    About it and About; but evermore
    came out by the same Door as in I went.
    (The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam)

  29. These are facts, not philosophical or religious dogma. Another fact: Sophisticated climate models show that things are going to get a lot worse. It’s bad enough that we’re gambling our children’s futures by doing so little to fight this problem; let’s not ask their teachers to lie to them about it too.

    I include the quote above because, in a world where everything is being recorded, 50 years from now these people will look intensely stupid.

    I’m a little rusty with the Mein Kampf quotes and don’t have a copy handy. Could someone please enlighten me as to the context of the quote? I assume Hitler wrote it and to quote Hitler in a sentence containing “truth” and “infamously” seems…well…intensely stupid.

  30. A physicist says:

    The LA Times and the Heartland Institute alike have a duty to “Be First with the Truth“.

    Nonsense. According to the premise upon which your screwy attempt at distraction is based, HI has no such duty. They are an advocacy organization, and are thus must closely analagous to lawyers, whom you declare have no such duty.

    In your screwy scenario, that leaves only the LA Times that has a duty to “Be First with the Truth“. Given that their OpEd above is rife with half truths, misleading statements and outright lies, if you truly gave a crap about “Be First with the Truth”, you would be beating them into submission with that principle. Instead you ignore them completely, and attack HI – currently the victim of scurrilous lies.

    You thus establish that you do not find yourself to have any duty to “Be First with the Truth“, and with it your irrelevance to discussions of that (or any other) moral principle.

  31. I wish people would calm down. In the future, this editorial will be used again and again against the LA Times for its extraordinary hubris in promoting AGW.

    The hyperbole only makes the LA Times look hysterical and ridiculous. Quoting “Mein Kampf”? Future generations will yuck this up.

    I am not a lawyer, but it seems to me that for the LA Times to quote a document that Heartland has already claimed to be fake would put the LA Times outside of First Amendment protection unless the LA Times can prove the key document to be true.

    Any takers?

  32. I just sent this to the editor:

    It is widely known that the articles you cite from the Heartland Institute, particularly the ones related to science education were fraudulently created by a third party.

    It is disturbing that the faked documents, were known to be faked within 24 hours of them being disseminated on the internet, yet you still referenced them. Furthermore, the Heartland institute itself made a press release that the document in question was faked.

    Why is a news service (you) knowingly reproducing libelous content based on faked documents.

    It seems you got your journalist standards from Mary Mapes and Dan Rather.

    I suppose if you can’t find news… you can always make some up.

  33. The AAAS needed to do a panel on how to “influence public perceptions and debate when the science supporting a position is not enough to carry the argument” because the science is so strong that there is no “scientific” controversy?

  34. Schitzree says:
    February 20, 2012 at 9:14 am
    OH, I see what they did there. It’s a Reverse Godwin. If the first person to accuse their opponent of being a Nazi looses the argument, Then the first to accuse THEMSELVES of being Nazis (by quoting ‘Mein Kampf’, for instance) makes their opponent loose.

    Beware of lose cannons (just as meaningless as what you have just written!)

  35. Frankly unbelievable.

    The vicious tone and vitriolic content of that editorial would have fit perfectly in “Der Sturmer” or the “Volkischer Beobachter,” yet they have the nerve to compare those of us with scientific reservations about AGW with the Nazis?

    Mann’s work repeatedly confirmed? Where do you start with people who are capable of outright denial of reality?

    Shame on the Los Angeles Times for allowing such garbage into print. Shame.

  36. Latitude says:
    February 20, 2012 at 9:24 am

    spread disinformation……

    I supposed just stating that the science is not settled….would fall into that category

    Sad truth is…as less and less people believe…..it will leave only the true nut jobs

    Are you saying that stating “the science is not settled” is spreading disinformation?

  37. Like every bully, they’re not used to people fighting back. It’s going to get a lot uglier but if the HI press on steadfastly, they’ll humble a lot of arrogant jackasses as well bagging enough dosh to keep them going for a decade or so.

    Thr alarmists simply don’t know when to stop digging.

    Pointman

  38. Well what can one say its from California. The newspaper is to lazy to check out some of the facts. If the earth was warming they would check w3ith the US navy about the Arctic and Antarctic ice. They would check the Satellite data and balloon data regarding temps over the last 10 -12 years. But this would go against the “Media Principal” of checking to make sure the facts are correct.

  39. Yet another blatant own goal from the Warmist camp. These guys don’t need any help from sceptics to lose the battle; we only need sit by and watch them self destruct. Popcorn, anyone?

  40. A physicist says: “The LA Times and the Heartland Institute alike have a duty to ‘Be First with the Truth’ …”

    JJ says: “Nonsense …:

    Well, the duty to be “Be First with the Truth” — or the lack of that same duty — is the heart of the debate, eh?

    Here opinions may reasonably differ, and I have posted elsewhere on WUWT on how our family has come to conceive that duty.

    The Heartland Institute has followed a different path, to an opposite conclusion … and I am grateful to America’s founders that the Heartland Institute’s lawyers have zero power over my opinions, or my free expression of them.

  41. I was unable to post my comment, and when I tried to re-login on another machine my password no longer worked. Can some one back me up?

    “Actually, they are working on a more rigorous curriculum. But who needs honesty when you have Mein Kampf and a press.”

  42. Well if the term “denier” is supposed to insult me, its not working.
    I rather enjoy being able to wear it as a badge of honour, but truth be known this is all a bit hypocritical of them as they deny anyone having a different viewpoint.
    See! More Deniers! Theyre all at it!
    Deniers in denying denial. …um…thing…

  43. Dear Heartland:

    When you finish those evil lesson plans, please send all high school modules to me at once, I assure you they will be gratefully used in my classroom.

    Sincerely,

    A Science Teacher

  44. Gary Meyers says:
    February 20, 2012 at 9:53 am

    “””Latitude says:
    February 20, 2012 at 9:24 am
    spread disinformation……
    I supposed just stating that the science is not settled…would fall into that category
    Sad truth is…as less and less people believe…..it will leave only the true nut jobs””””

    Are you saying that stating “the science is not settled” is spreading disinformation?
    ======================================================
    No Gary, I’m saying that is what the LA Times seems to be saying……………..
    “spread disinformation” is the quote from the LA Times

  45. Citing Hitler as a reference! Yeah what a top banana he was! At least you didn’t see him using lies and propaganda did you. What an ungrateful lot we are when you consider all he did for the planet. I notice that Wikipedia cites a psychological profile: “his primary rules were ..never allow the public to cool off”… maybe the global warming alarmists now have another cause of global warming to reference.
    What appalling “journalism”. [SNIP: Maybe a joke, but a step too far. -REP]

  46. peer-reviewed scientific journals and agree that the planet is warming…..Seven of the 10 warmest years since

    I see this over and over again. Yes, the last dozen years have seen some of the warmest on record, however according to RSS, Hadcrut3, and the sea surface temperatures, there has been no change for 15 years. There is a huge difference between “is warming” and being warm.

  47. Honestly, I have no problems accepting the idea that humans are changing the climate. There are many examples of humans changing climate on many scales, starting with city heat islands and ending perhaps with human influence on Sahara’s continuous growth caused by exploitation of water sources and foliage.
    But I also don’t remember anybody connected to Heartland ever saying that humans are not changing climate.
    So all the LA Times newspaper has problems with is apparently nothing more than a quote from another newspaper.
    In fact I find it rather funny.

  48. The LA times isn’t comparing skeptics with Hitler, they’re comparing us with Jews (unwittingly of course) who were indeed an oppressed people telling the truth. Hitler falsely accused the Jews of purporting “The Big Lie”, but it was the accusation that was the lie, and the most PROGRESSIVE nation on Earth at the time bought it hook, line, and sinker. Let’s hope our republic is not as gullible as the Weimar Republic.

    Here’s the relevant passage from the wikipedia article about the propaganda technique Hitler used that has become known as “The Big Lie”.

    But it remained for the Jews, with their unqualified capacity for falsehood, and their fighting comrades, the Marxists, to impute responsibility for the downfall precisely to the man who alone had shown a superhuman will and energy in his effort to prevent the catastrophe which he had foreseen and to save the nation from that hour of complete overthrow and shame. By placing responsibility for the loss of the world war on the shoulders of Ludendorff they took away the weapon of moral right from the only adversary dangerous enough to be likely to succeed in bringing the betrayers of the Fatherland to Justice.
    All this was inspired by the principle–which is quite true within itself–that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.

    —Adolf Hitler , Mein Kampf, vol. I, ch. X[1]

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

  49. A physicist says:

    Well, the duty to be “Be First with the Truth” — or the lack of that same duty — is the heart of the debate, eh?

    No, it is merely the premise of your assinine framing of this issue. Within that framework, the LA Times has such a duty, yet you remain silent regarding their deriliction of that duty. Instead, you continue to defame HI, currently the victims of scurrilous lies. Duty to truth is obviously not on your list of standing orders.

    The LA Times states that Mann’s 1,000 year hockey stick graph has been “validated repeatedly”. In fact, it has been invalidated repeatedly, not least of all by the NAS panel that otherwise whitewashed the subject. There’s some truth for you to be first with, shoud the mood ever strike you.

    The validity of Mann’s near term hockey stick is also impeached by the very proxies from which it (or the convenient parts of it, anyways- lol) is constructed. The divergence problem was hidden in the materials provided for propagandizing the public – adverse results were hidden. Do scientists have any duty to be “Be First with the Truth”, in your world?

    Evidently not, else you would be busy pointing out that lack of truth in what LA Times reported. You got scientists failing the truth, and newspapers perpetuating the fraud, and faced with that you decide to derail this thread by making derogatory posts about HI, currently the victim of scurrilous lies.

    Your relationship to the truth is abundantly clear.

  50. What drivel from the LA Times. What lies, what blatant propagandising, what deep irony to quote from Mein Kampf to attack the Heartland Institute – projection at its finest!

    The mainstream media make me sick. They have prostituted what used to be an honourable occupation; the ‘fourth estate’, I believe Americans call it. It’s meant to be one of the ‘checks and balances’ of a ‘free and democratic society’.

    I firmly believe the corporate interests which control the vast majority of the mainstream media don’t give a damn about freedom and democracy and – this is pure speculation on my part – when they meet with their masters they probably have a good old laugh about it.

    I read somewhere that 6 major global media corporations control 90% of global news coverage. I personaly do not doubt that – that’s what globalism does over time: survival of the fittest and all that.

    Mind control is well developed these days. Hitler and Goebells were clearly interested in these ideas and they have been highly developed since then. Please search for Edward Bernais or watch the excellent ‘The Century of the Self’ documentary which is available online (at least in the uk).

    They have hoped to use these lies about climate change and the incessant barrage of propaganda (some of it vile and beyond evil – e.g. no pressure (shock everyone) and the CO2 monster (scare children)) to further their agenda and they will not give up on it. No way.

    It’s just propaganda. We know that, but most people believe it, unfortunately.

  51. Sue them for defamation and then compare the creation of the fake protocols of the elders of zion to the fake Heartland document.

  52. It was the irony of the LA Times – in their online article – linking to these words of Hitler from Mein Kampf which moved me to post my comment above (sorry if somebody’s already done this):

    “in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation”.

    Does that not sound totally like the modern day climate scam to you? It sure does to me!

    Please feel free to research Project Paperclip to find out where the Nazi mind scientists went after World War II.

  53. Fredrick Lightfoot says:
    February 20, 2012 at 9:34 am

    Myself when young did eagerly frequent
    Doctor and Saint, and even heard great Argument
    About it and About; but evermore
    came out by the same Door as in I went.
    (The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam)

    Another one for the LA Times:

    The Moving Finger writes: and, having writ,
    Moves on: nor all thy Piety nor Wit
    Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line,
    Nor all thy Tears wash out a Word of it.

  54. I posted the following at the LATimes (Unfortunately, because of “too many characters” I couldn’t get the quote in with the orginal post.):

    theduke at 11:32 AM February 20, 2012

    It’s interesting to take a look at the Hitler quote in context, the context being that the Fuhrer in waiting was sliming the Jews for blaming Luddendorf for the German defeat in WWI.

    The profound irony of the LATimes approvingly using a quote from Hitler sliming the Jews to likewise slime so-called “deniers” speaks for itself.

    That the so-called “settled science” is being challenged by legions of high-ranking, established scientists around the world is not in doubt; nor is the religious fervor of those, like the people who wrote this editorial, who insist on claiming there should be no more debate. The position of the LATimes on this issue is nothing short of scientific anti-intellectualism.

    theduke at 11:34 AM February 20, 2012

    Hitler’s quote in context:

    \\But it remained for the Jews, with their unqualified capacity for falsehood, and their fighting comrades, the Marxists, to impute responsibility for the downfall precisely to the man who alone had shown a superhuman will and energy in his effort to prevent the catastrophe which he had foreseen and to save the nation from that hour of complete overthrow and shame. By placing responsibility for the loss of the world war on the shoulders of Ludendorff they took away the weapon of moral right from the only adversary dangerous enough to be likely to succeed in bringing the betrayers of the Fatherland to Justice.
    All this was inspired by the principle–which is quite true within itself–that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. . .//

  55. I posted the following in two posts at the LA Times. Because of length limitations, I had to divide it into two posts:

    theduke at 11:32 AM February 20, 2012

    It’s interesting to take a look at the Hitler quote in context, the context being that the Fuhrer in waiting was sliming the Jews for blaming Luddendorf for the German defeat in WWI.

    The profound irony of the LATimes approvingly using a quote from Hitler sliming the Jews to likewise slime so-called “deniers” speaks for itself.

    That the so-called “settled science” is being challenged by legions of high-ranking, established scientists around the world is not in doubt; nor is the religious fervor of those, like the people who wrote this editorial, who insist on claiming there should be no more debate. The position of the LATimes on this issue is nothing short of scientific anti-intellectualism.

    Reply
    Report Abuse

    1

    0

    Avatarplaceholder
    theduke at 11:34 AM February 20, 2012

    Hitler’s quote in context:

    But it remained for the Jews, with their unqualified capacity for falsehood, and their fighting comrades, the Marxists, to impute responsibility for the downfall precisely to the man who alone had shown a superhuman will and energy in his effort to prevent the catastrophe which he had foreseen and to save the nation from that hour of complete overthrow and shame. By placing responsibility for the loss of the world war on the shoulders of Ludendorff they took away the weapon of moral right from the only adversary dangerous enough to be likely to succeed in bringing the betrayers of the Fatherland to Justice.
    All this was inspired by the principle–which is quite true within itself–that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. . .

  56. bwahahahahaha!!!

    There is a reason why they are losing subscribers over the last few years.Many people are on the internet and see the disinformation and lies laced with stupid editorials.They are tired of the carp being explicated as fact and propaganda.This very blog entry is a prime example of exposing the absurdity of the LALALA Times.

    Then there is the fact that with a large drop in having birds as pets in homes greatly reduces the need for birdcage lining.

  57. LA Times I assume means Laughably Alarmist Times :-)

    I must admit though, that if you need to quote from Mein Kampf you are either mentally struggling or an intellectual freak?

    As for spreading disinformation well one needs to look no further than the Fiddlestick Team and their fellow travellers on the Green Gravy Train.

  58. pat says:
    February 20, 2012 at 8:53 am

    What a delusional. ignorant, piece. I suspect the outline came from Mann himself.
    —————————————————–
    Mann is a useful idiot. He doesn’t write the script and he doesn’t know there is a script.

  59. Robert Howden says:
    February 20, 2012 at 9:00 am

    Did you see the picture they use for the editorial? “A section of the ice sheet covering much of Greenland is seen in this 2005 aerial photo.” I didn’t know Greenland was an ocean.
    ———————————————————–
    I thought that as well. It’s been a long day so I don’t have time to go back and look but that’s exactly what I thought at the time as well; straight away I thought that.

  60. No wonder it is so hard to get a grip on the environmentalists crowd, it’s just a hodgepodge chaotic collection of all kinds of socialist extremists and fundamentalists from right to left.

    I wonder how long it will take until they start quoting Saddam, he was a socialist too after all.

  61. I don’t find it hard to believe at all that Mein Kampf would be widely read among members of the main stream media and elitists. That would be perfectly natural for them.

    I find it hilarious that one of them would slip up and quote from it. To attribute our actions to be in line with that book, while actually condemning a fraudulent document produced by a true believer; profoundly ironic. For a journalist to admit to pulling quotes from that book; very telling indeed.

  62. There is nothing wrong in quoting Hitler in an argument on global warming. In fact in support of this I cite;… Genghis Khan, Osama Bin Laden, Saddam Hussain, Col Gaddaffi… The consensus amongst dictators proves that the science is settled.

    Perhaps it was a Freudian Slip (or landslide) and they were suggesting that all books disagreeing with them should be burnt.

  63. Wasn’t that shark named Godwin jumped the first time the cult equated adhering to the scientific method with holocaust denial?

  64. The LA Times is an organization of Brown Shirts dyed Green. Their propaganda does not wash with the majority anymore. The support of MMs Hockey Stick by the fuzzy bits has always been thin. These people are growing increasable stupid as they lose the war.

  65. In his “Be First with the Truth” post of 9:01 this morning A physicist says, “…that lawyers and judges alike are forbidden to control the public dialog.
    The Heartland Institute now is seeking to delegate responsibility for truth to its lawyers … and *that* is a decision that reflects seriously bad judgment and a profound dereliction of duty on the part of the Heartland Institute.”

    In the context of the Mann vs. Ball defamation action, which I am presuming is not yet resolved, there arises a question I would insist A physicist answer. That question is would he agree that Michael Mann “…now is seeking to delegate responsibility for truth to [his] lawyers … and *that* is a decision that reflects seriously bad judgment and a profound dereliction of duty on the part of [Michael Mann]”?

    Ron

  66. It’s not often I actually laugh out loud at MSM coverage but I did at this one from the LA Times (and I know it’s an old cliche, but the monitor was narrowly spared from an intense beer atomisation episode):

    “The latest skirmish, by contrast, is centered on a scientific issue that has nothing to do with religious teaching: climate change”.

    I still can’t read it without getting involuntary spasms of amusement.

  67. The LAT didn’t “Invoke” Godwin’s Law, it triggered it. Once the Nazis are mentioned “that [Usenet] thread is over, and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever argument was in progress.”

  68. I don’t think CAGWarmists can afford to get people thinking about who really relies upon “big lie” propaganda methods nowadays.

    A read of “Watermelons” by Dellingpole shows who the “big lie” proponents are for our time…. Catastrophists who use an endless succession of green scares to grab more power.

  69. I might be Australian, but the link to the Daily Caller that mentions the Rockefeller Foundation donating to the anti-XL pipeline activists is not in the least bit surprising.

    The Rockefeller family are well known for their dirty tricks in the oil game. If you do a little bit of research on how they obtained their fortune it is quite illuminating.

    It is therefore, no surprise that Exxon Mobil has been funding the green lobby. Big Oil, that is the Rockefeller family has a lot to gain by doing things such as attempting to destroy the reputation of smaller oil producers such as the Koch brother. They do not want cheap oil coming from shale oil to flow because that will decrease the price per barrell of oil.

    Keep looking behind the curtain.

  70. PWC unlikely to impress Brisbane folks who are experiencing one of their mildest winters ever:

    21 Feb: Sydney Morning Herald: Katherine Feeney: Heatwave warning: ‘Harden up’ attitude not helping
    An extreme heat event in 2050 could kill more than 1000 Brisbane people in a few days unless emergency response strategies are significantly improved, according to a new report on heatwaves.
    Produced by Price Waterhouse Coopers in collaboration with the Department of Climate Change and Energy and Efficiency, the publication claims heatwaves kill more Australians than any other national disaster, including floods and bushfires…
    Mr Beale (PWC) said Bureau of Meteorology modelling showed extreme heat events were expected to occur more often and with greater intensity in the future, particularly in the southern regions of Australia…
    For the development of this report, PWC formed an advisory group which included the Bureau of Meteorology, federal and state government agencies and the private sector.
    PWC worked with BOM data and conducted actuarial analysis which looked at temperatures across Australia on every day since 1958 and matched those with deaths over the same period.

    http://www.smh.com.au/queensland/heatwave-warning-harden-up-attitude-not-helping-20120220-1tjif.html

  71. rond says: In the context of the Mann vs. Ball defamation action, which I am presuming is not yet resolved, there arises a question I would insist A physicist answer. That question is would he agree that Michael Mann “…now is seeking to delegate responsibility for truth to [his] lawyers … and *that* is a decision that reflects seriously bad judgment and a profound dereliction of duty on the part of [Michael Mann]”?

    Rond, I hadn’t heard of it. But history tells us that when scientist sues scientist, little or no good is likely to come of it. And when institutes sue reporters, the most likely outcome is even worse, namely, a chilling of public debate.

    In the long run, as Richard Feynman reminded us, “Nature cannot be fooled.” That is where the strongest skepticism and the strongest science both focus their attention … the rest is destined to be forgotten.

  72. yet another of today’s CAGW Scares:

    21 Feb: ABC Australia: Marine species at risk as oceans acidify
    British scientists say the current level of carbon dioxide emissions will wipe out about 30 per cent of the world’s marine species by the end of the century…
    Scientists at Plymouth University in England have examined underwater volcanoes, where carbon dioxide bubbles naturally, to see how marine life copes in acidic water.
    Dr Jason Hall Spencer says a lot of organisms cannot survive in such conditions…

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-02-20/marine-species-at-risk-as-oceans-acidify/3840854/?site=melbourne

    21 Feb: PhysOrg: British scientist warns AAAS of the threat posed by ocean acidification
    Dr Jason Hall-Spencer, of Plymouth University, says that the combination of ocean acidification and rising water temperatures kills off corals, shellfish and other valuable marine life – posing a risk to industries such as fishing and tourism.
    Dr Hall-Spencer addressed the Annual Meeting of the AAAS (The American Association for the Advancement of Science) in Vancouver and presented his findings from studying biodiversity at naturally occurring underwater CO2 vents…

    http://www.physorg.com/news/2012-02-british-scientist-aaas-threat-posed.html

  73. Like the Koran and the last Harry Potter novels, Mein Kampf was in serious need of an editor. But then, who’s going to tell der Fuehrer he needs to reorganize his text?

  74. Does anyone normal even read “Mein Kampf”, let alone publicise the fact by quoting from it? Shows a strange fascination with psychotic egomonaniacs to my way of thinking – oh wait, now I see the link!

  75. Ha ha ha! They might as well say “acidification” will kill off 300% of marine species – it would have the same validity within their error bars… He he he…

    Their misplaced confidence is classic hubris and this kind of embarrassingly bad science is typically associated with Climatology – the day will come when this crazy talk is swept into the dustbin of history, but I fear there is far too much tax dollars flowing freely for that day to come anytime soon… Ugh.

  76. Thanks greatly to Alexander Feht for this:

    As to the so-called “Godwin’s law” — it is not a law, and it doesn’t exist.
    Life is not a game, and history should be remembered.

    It should indeed. With that in mind, thanks to John West for the correct context:

    When Hitler said that he was referring to what he called “The Big Lie” that Ludendorff was responsible for losing WWI and accused the Jews of being the liars to throw off there own guilt in being responsible for Germany’s troubles. In fact is was Ludendorff that was largely responsible for losing WWI by advocating submarine warfare which helped bring the US into the war and logistical mistakes which caused heavy losses from un-reinforced offensive maneuvers. Therefore, the accusation of the “Big Lie” was the real lie that helped lead Germany down the path of WWII and the Holocaust.

    How fitting that the LA Times have cast themselves as the false accuser for political gain.

    and later:

    The LA times isn’t comparing skeptics with Hitler, they’re comparing us with Jews (unwittingly of course) who were indeed an oppressed people telling the truth.

    First they compare us with Holocaust deniers, now with the Jews that Hitler was falsely accusing of lying, as the very start of his maniacal political campaign that ended in their mass murder.

    Despite being logical opposites these are both very violent analogies and that it seems to me is the link. Some lies truly are despicable and lead to mass murder. The LA Times wants to smear us and this time the message seems to be: even though Hitler was a monster if he was to criticise these people, he’d have his good points. So we’ll use his words against them.

    It’s violent language but, it’s only fair to add, it won’t necessarily lead to mass murder.

    Cheerful thoughts.

  77. You can rub a lefties nose in it and they are to dense to get it. My dog is smarter, just witness the goofy comments that non physicist contributes.

  78. Seriously though this is so wrong on so may levels. I cannot imagine that there would be a Jewish subscriber to this paper that would not be deeply offended by the use of Hitler’s words. How can a person using such quotes in the mainstream media keep their job?

    I would assume that the Jewish community would be utterly and properly outraged by such a reference and there are plenty of Jews in Los Angeles. The aftermath of this should be such a loss of circulation that the Company owning this paper would be obliged to sack such a person if for no other reason than a ludicrous lack of judgement. I am not against free speech, but as we all know the media is not there to report the truth but to sell column inches or airtime. Just from a hard business perspective this should hurt their ciruclation figures so badly that they would have to do something about it.

    On the other hand what were the editorial board thinking? Surely they should have filtered such a reference unless they somehow agree with the use of the words of one of the worlds worst genocidal maniacs. Are they covert Nazis? I thought the LAT was a left wing paper. Who knows what hidden agenda is being expressed when the Mainstream Media starts quoting Hitler?

  79. Yep, Goldie, I was just about to post the same sentiments. AFAIK, LA has a large and influential Jewish community, and I hope they are all over this disgraceful editorial and the paper’s management like white on rice.

    I too wonder about an editorial writer who is conversant enough with Mein Kampf to quote it, leaving aside the abysmal judgement involved in mentioning it at all. Life is short, and there are far too many great books that one will never have time to read. MK is not likely to be on my reading list, although I can understand why historians might have to wade through it.

    BTW, I am not Jewish, but one doesn’t have to be to be offended by this rubbish. It repudiates so many basic ethical values, it would take some time to list them all.

    The author and those who permitted its publication are low life scum.

    • At 5:15 PM on 20 February johanna had written:

      I too wonder about an editorial writer who is conversant enough with Mein Kampf to quote it, leaving aside the abysmal judgement involved in mentioning it at all. Life is short, and there are far too many great books that one will never have time to read. MK is not likely to be on my reading list, although I can understand why historians might have to wade through it.

      Something quite similar to this sentiment had previously been voiced by other posters, and along with them johanna is dead wrong.

      In order to defend civil comity, good order, and the preservation of individual human rights, it is necessary not merely for “historians” but all conscientious folk to develop and maintain knowledge of the promulgations issued by the enemies of liberty, from Machiavelli’s The Prince through Sir Robert Filmer’s Patriacha to the present-day lying viciousness of the AGW fraudsters.

      One cannot with maximum effectiveness counter the noise of such malevolent bastids without the ability to understand and – when necessary – to quote their propaganda.

      You can’t debunk and otherwise attack what you don’t know, and personal distaste is no bloody excuse at all.

  80. Johanna, my surname is Goldstone and as far as I can tell our family hasn’t been Jewish for a long time, but that wouldn’t have helped me much had I been in Europe during the second world war. Its just an obscene thing to do in the truest sense of obscenity.

  81. Tucci78 I do agree with you, my personal distate is the manner in which such a quotation was used as if its ok to incorporate such literature into the vast resource of humanities writings and quote it offhand. This type of writing has a special place and no doubt is commonly quoted on neo-nazi blog sites who choose to excercise their right to freedom of speech in such a manner. The infamy here is that it was used carelessly (?) in an opinion piece in a mainstream public newspaper.

  82. John Wright says:
    February 20, 2012 at 9:52 am
    Beware of lose cannons (just as meaningless as what you have just written!)

    Took me a minute to figure out what you meant. :)
    Now I feel silly. And Spellcheck assured me that the only thing I was misspelling was ‘Mein Kampf’.

  83. Goldie says:
    February 20, 2012 at 4:08 pm
    On the other hand what were the editorial board thinking? Surely they should have filtered such a reference unless they somehow agree with the use of the words of one of the worlds worst genocidal maniacs. Are they covert Nazis? I thought the LAT was a left wing paper. Who knows what hidden agenda is being expressed when the Mainstream Media starts quoting Hitler?

    Left and right wings are merely the opposite sides of the same coin, Marxism.

    The LA Times was owned by the Tribune until the whole lot was bought out and turned into a private company:

    http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/tribune-completes-going-private-transaction-sam-zell-named-chairman–ceo-58835117.html

    http://benton.org/sites/benton.org/files/Tribune%20Fact%20Sheet.Final_.pdf

    Who Owns the News

    All but two on the following list are members of the Council on Foreign Relations whose stated aim is:

    “The stated goal of the CFR is to manipulate the News to bring about a new world order or corporate control of everything. This is not some weird conspiracy theory, it is stated in their original charter.”

    “What Liberal or Right Wing Media? It’s Just Corporate Media.

    Who really controls the media? Is the so called “liberal media” that the right complains about controlled by Hollywood and liberal special interests? Is Fox News controlled by the Republican Party? If you believe any of these generalizations you are dead wrong and the truth will shock you.

    Major multinational corporations, Middle Eastern sovereign wealth funds and Saudi Princes, all hell bent on protecting their own interests, choose what you will see on the nightly news and trick you into believing it is unbiased reporting. As we see below all the major news outlets, regardless of what they make you believe, contributed heavily to George W. Bush in both 2000 and 2004 so any argument that they are controlled by liberals evaporates. In this case they all supported the candidate that promised to allow consolidation of multiple media companies.

    The very news stories that you are fed by the mainstream media are manipulated to mirror the public relations campaigns of companies that operate nuclear plants, sprawling theme parks that gobble up wetlands, defense contractors, oil companies and even Saudi Princes. Remember the old “Outer Limits” TV shows where the announcer says “We control everything you see and hear, the vertical, the horizontal,” etc? The corporate controlled news media controls all you see and hear.

    Here are the top twenty media corporations in the U.S. according to mediaowners.com All but two of the following, #18 and #19 are not members of the Council On Foreign Relations.”

    1. Time Warner Inc.
    2. Walt Disney Company
    3. Viacom Inc.
    4. News Corporation
    5. CBS Corporation
    6. Cox Enterprises
    7. NBC Universal
    8. Gannett Company, Inc.
    9. Clear Channel Communications Inc.
    10. Advance Publications, Inc.
    11. Tribune Company
    12. McGraw-Hill Companies
    13. Hearst Corporation
    14. Washington Post Company
    15. The New York Times Company
    16. E.W. Scripps Co.
    17. McClatchy Company
    18. Thomson Corporation
    19. Freedom Communications, Inc.
    20. A&E Television Networks

    http://www.whoownsthenews.com/

  84. Isn’t arguing that any and all comparisons to nazi’s and how they accomplished the take over of an entire incredibly powerful nation nations resources just begging to allow it to happen again?

  85. Tucci78 says:
    February 20, 2012 at 5:55 pm

    At 5:15 PM on 20 February johanna had written:

    I too wonder about an editorial writer who is conversant enough with Mein Kampf to quote it, leaving aside the abysmal judgement involved in mentioning it at all. Life is short, and there are far too many great books that one will never have time to read. MK is not likely to be on my reading list, although I can understand why historians might have to wade through it.

    Something quite similar to this sentiment had previously been voiced by other posters, and along with them johanna is dead wrong.

    In order to defend civil comity, good order, and the preservation of individual human rights, it is necessary not merely for “historians” but all conscientious folk to develop and maintain knowledge of the promulgations issued by the enemies of liberty, from Machiavelli’s The Prince through Sir Robert Filmer’s Patriacha to the present-day lying viciousness of the AGW fraudsters.

    One cannot with maximum effectiveness counter the noise of such malevolent bastids without the ability to understand and – when necessary – to quote their propaganda.

    You can’t debunk and otherwise attack what you don’t know, and personal distaste is no bloody excuse at all.
    —————————————————————————————-
    Tucci, I do not need to read every bit of garbage spewed out by totalitarian mass murderers, terrorists, serial killers, pedophiles, or any other unpleasant life form in order to repudiate them. People who have an academic or prurient interest are free to do so, however.

    I have read extensively about WW2, and assure you that there is plenty of evidence of what Hitler and Co. did without a requirement to read his personal maunderings. Apart from Nazi apologists and other fringe groups, there is not a lot of dispute that he was responsible for about 50 million deaths.

    There is no comparison with debating current scientific issues, which of course does require reading what you are disputing.

    • At 7:09 PM on 20 February, johanna continues to stump for the joys of willful ignorance, writing:

      Tucci, I do not need to read every bit of garbage spewed out by totalitarian mass murderers, terrorists, serial killers, pedophiles, or any other unpleasant life form in order to repudiate them. People who have an academic or prurient interest are free to do so, however.

      I have read extensively about WW2, and assure you that there is plenty of evidence of what Hitler and Co. did without a requirement to read his personal maunderings. Apart from Nazi apologists and other fringe groups, there is not a lot of dispute that he was responsible for about 50 million deaths.

      Hm. And how, johanna, would you like to undergo diagnosis and treatment at the hands of a medical doctor who took the same attitude toward the study of pathology?

      I do like johanna‘s overt and deliberate determination to evade knowledge of the above-mentioned promulgations – which provide open and easily accessible insight into these enemies’ thought processes, motives, and action plans – in favor of leaving the unpleasant learning process in the hands of those “who have an academic or prurient interest,” at the very least relying on experts of whom johanna has also little knowledge, and in whom johanna can have absolutely no reason to repose trust.

      Jeez, johanna, but could I forward to you some e-mails I’ve received from parties in Nigeria regarding opportunities for you to make mad wonderful profits in the recovery of funds from the U.S. bank accounts of West African petroleum industrialists convicted in money laundering schemes?

      You sound like just the kind of…er, qualified participant…for whom those e-mailers have been looking.

  86. So, now that Gleick has outed himself as the lying, cheating, fraudulent, scumbag that he is … LA Times can shove their equally misguided article right into a place where the sun don’t shine.

  87. Tucci, your personal attacks do you no credit, and are irrelevant to the issue under discussion. FYI I have never lost a cent to a financial scam or even made a bad financial deal in my life. My faults may well be legion, but gullibility is not one of them.

    The thought processes of certain types of people are of no interest to me. I care about what they do, not what is going on in their disordered brains. Mein Kampf was available long before WW2 broke out, and did absolutely nothing to prevent it – on the contrary.

    Next you will be prescribing reading courses in schools of the writings of the worst people in history to ‘inoculate’ children. Personally, I think it is better to stick with the good and the inspirational, but then, delving in the sewers of the human condition is not my thing.

    • Construing as “personal attacks” upon her my criticism of her determination to keep her eyes squeezed shut and her fingers in her ears chanting “Nurmee-nurmee-nurmee, I’m not listening!”, at 7:57 PM on 20 February, johanna claims (without support) that all arguments for maintaining situational awareness in disputes of one’s enemies’ announced intentions and strategies:

      …are irrelevant to the issue under discussion.

      Yeah, sure. Moreover:

      FYI I have never lost a cent to a financial scam or even made a bad financial deal in my life. My faults may well be legion, but gullibility is not one of them.

      Uh-huh. So johanna isn’t aware of having been suckered. Might could very well be that’s because johanna is hewing faithfully to her own expressed policy of maintaining a state of ignorance.

      Confidence men just love marks who are absolutely sure that “gullibility is not one of” their own character flaws. Self-honestly, on t’other hand, recognizes that there are always going to be situations in which one can and will get gulled, and thus facilitates mitigatory perspicacity.

      Further elucidating her vulnerabilities, johanna writes:

      The thought processes of certain types of people are of no interest to me. I care about what they do, not what is going on in their disordered brains. Mein Kampf was available long before WW2 broke out, and did absolutely nothing to prevent it – on the contrary.

      Yep. Ditto for the expressed doctrines leading up to Stalin’s Holodomor in the years immediately preceding Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s administration extending diplomatic recognition to the government of the U.S.S.R.

      The ideas behind that species of authoritarianism – as was the case with Mein Kampf and the publications of other opinion leaders in the National Socialist German Workers’ Party during the 1920s and ’30s – were ignored for reasons chiefly of political expedience, aided by the encouragement of popular sentiments to the effect that “He/They can’t really mean something so absolutely horrible, can he/they?”

      Well, yeah. Of course they did. Proved it, too, with corpses stacked in the tens of millions to prove their sincerity.

      Being myself the kind of fella who understands that ideas have consequences (pace Mrs. O’Connor, who lived through those decades), and that “what they do” has a whole helluva lot to do with [t]he thought processes of certain types of people,” I reject completely johanna‘s determination to evade study of those “thought proceses”.

      Like any other physician, I don’t want to cause cancers. But I sure as hell want ot learn as much as I can about what conditions and activities predispose to the development of malignant diseases. That’s because such knowledge not only helps to reduce exposure to causative factors but also to get at the earliest possible diagnoses of such diseases.

      This is why johanna really doesn’t want to seek the care of a medical doctor who approaches the study of pathology in the same way that johanna herself is determined to obliterate thought about (much less knowledge of):

      …the writings of the worst people in history…

      …in her determination:

      … to stick with the good and the inspirational…”

      Jeez, so much emphasis upon sweetness. Shall we discuss diabetes mellitus now?

  88. Your preoccupation with sickness and pathological behaviour has led you down some dark paths, Tucci. But I suggest you put the bottle away and hit the sack now, that being my most charitable explanation for your OTT and off topic personal attacks.

    • Abandoning completely her pretense of reasoned argument (if we could ever call what she’s been writing “reasoned”) and descending completely and unequivocally into “personal attacks” upon this your humble deponent, at 10:04 PM on 20 February, we’ve got johanna writing (in toto)

      Your preoccupation with sickness and pathological behaviour has led you down some dark paths, Tucci. But I suggest you put the bottle away and hit the sack now, that being my most charitable explanation for your OTT and off topic personal attacks.

      And thus does johanna yelpingly screw the proverbial pooch.

      It is observed that criticism of what a communicant posts in the way of argument for a point or policy or action can in no way be construed as “personal attacks” upon that disputant, and only someone who (arguably neurotically) so thoroughly identifies with his/her articulations in a public forum would possibly take such critique as directly “personal.”

      Saying that someone’s position is so invalid as to be qualitatively idiotic is not the same as saying that someone – like johanna – his him/herself an idiot.

      On t’other hand, implying that a respondent has been boozing it up and only uttering what he has posted out of alcoholic inebriation is both an evasion of the responsibility to stick to the topic (originally raised by johanna, please note; see her post above) but also falls most assuredly into the category of “personal attacks” in and of itself.

      Having reminded the readers here that I’m a physician (and therefore have a professional “preoccupation with sickness and pathological behaviour”), I’ve drawn an analogy between medical pathology and the praxeological malignancies of thought and action manifest in the histories of political authoritarianism.

      Now, were the analogy not robust (as I think it to be), one would suppose that johanna would be working contrariwise along that line of argument, right?

      Ah, but no. Instead johanna has to submerge herself in the sewer of “personal attacks” upon an online contestant about whom she supposes much and knows vanishingly little.

      Sheesh. It’s like debating one of my grandkids.

  89. Lady Life Grows says: “Cancel our subscriptions??? Since when are WUWT readers such idiots as to get their news from the L.A. “Grimes” (as L. Ron Hubbard called them in “Battlefield Earth) or similar newsrags? We don’t have subscriptions to cancel!”

    Whenever the LA Times subscription peddlers used to call, I’d tell them I had a subscription to Pravda and had no need for the Times. I was fibbing, of course. I dropped the Times when our last parakeet died.

  90. Goldie says: “Does anyone normal even read “Mein Kampf”, let alone publicise the fact by quoting from it? Shows a strange fascination with psychotic egomonaniacs to my way of thinking – oh wait, now I see the link!”

    I tried to read MK in college and found it nearly unreadable in German. Regrettably, it’s very difficult to obtain accurate copies online. Germany has banned it, resulting in online availability mostly in the sanitized English verson only. Hitler didn’t allow it to be published in English (or any other language) in its full, original form for obvious reasons: it all too clearly spelled out what he intended to do.

    “To read Mein Kampf in German is the beginning of wisdom in international affairs” –Sir Robert Ensor, 1938.

    Your puerile judgmentalism is interfering with your ability to say anything meaningful here. The pity is that too many European politicians had the same attitude and failed to read MK before 1930, when something could have been done about Hitler.

  91. Your puerile judgmentalism is interfering with your ability to say anything meaningful here. The pity is that too many European politicians had the same attitude and failed to read MK before 1930, when something could have been done about Hitler.
    (Comment directed at Goldie)
    —————————————————-
    jorge, as I said above, speaking as another ‘puerile judgementalist ‘in your estimation, Mein Kampf is history – it was published about 90 years ago. It is certainly true that there might have been value in people outside Germany reading it in the 1920s and 30s, but if they did, it made not a jot of difference. Reading it now is about as meaningful as reading the babblings of the Swedish mass murderer. If you want to understand how WW2 came about, the answer is not there. It is in the broader political and economic history of Europe – Hitler was just the catalyst. Very likely, if he had never been born, WW2 would have happened anyway.

    While some people may obtain vicarious thrills from reading the outbursts of the deranged, I do not. It is sometimes worth trawling through their narcissistic and invariably sludgy prose if they represent a current or future threat. Aside from that, why on earth would you bother? Nothing of historical import is revealed. There is too much important, useful or just plain pleasurable stuff to read instead, unless you have a particular interest in the mindset of the depraved for its own sake.

  92. A physicist says:
    February 20, 2012 at 9:01 am

    Obviously, you should stick to physics, because you know absolutely NOTHING about law or legal ethics.

    Neither lawyers or judges are allowed to knowingly suborn perjury on the part of their clients in any state of the United States. It is both a criminal and a disbarable offense. Likewise, it is an ethical principle of EVERY code of legal professional responsibility in the United States that lawyers are to be zealous advocates “within the bounds of law.” The term “within the bounds of law” has realistic meaning in today’s jurisprudence (but I doubt it has enough meaning within the scientific community). Although some lawyers have stretched the envelope of that fundamental principle, they have not stretched it like some climate scientists and their lackeys (yourself included) have stretched the truth these days when it comes to CO2 and climate.

    You are the LAST person who should be attacking lawyers and judges.

  93. I also concur with Richard Drake’s analysis about the “Big Lie.” It is exactly what big liars do to opponents of their lies. And runaway, uncontrollable, catastrophic AGW has quickly achieved the status of big lie exposed and decisively refuted.

    Perhaps that is what disturbs the LA Times. They can’t hide in their bubble anymore.

  94. We’ll see if everything goes quiet “on the Western Front”–and whether the LA Times prints a retraction, explanation, and apology.

    I doubt we’ll see anything more than a classified ad for Gleick’s used leather chair.

  95. Not surprising when you consider that the Director of the IPCC is a Commander of the Order of King Leopold II, the mega-murderer of the Congo.

  96. johanna says:
    February 21, 2012 at 1:29 am
    “If you want to understand how WW2 came about, the answer is not there. It is in the broader political and economic history of Europe – Hitler was just the catalyst. Very likely, if he had never been born, WW2 would have happened anyway.”

    No, far, far from it. Consider that after Hitler’s rise to power, he defied the French, occupying the Saarland and breaking the Versailles treaty, later the German speaking parts of Czechia, and Austria – in all these cases, the locals consented (not the Czech government, of course, but the people in the annexed areas). Western powers appeased him, showing understanding. He could have rested on his laurels – he actually did, slacking off at the Obersalzberg.

    WW2 only started a while after this initial expansion and was a completely different operation.

  97. From the LA Times, “Leaked documents from the Heartland Institute in Chicago…”

    Hey, do you know who else other than the LA Times mentioned Chicago at one time or another? Hitler.

    We can all play that game :). So can Hitler.

  98. Of course, a major population reduction to save Nature may be the unspoken green elephant implied by the call to depend on renewable energy only. This could make Hitler seem to be a multiple order of magnitude piker.

  99. Anthony, as a postscript to this conversation I contacted the Simon Wiesentahl Institute in LA, assuming they would be concerned that this book had been quoted in such an offhand way regardless of the context.
    Apparently not, they received no other correspondence on this matter and concluded that it’s use “was not intended to cause offence”.
    It seems that at the age of 52, I still have a lot to learn about the ways of the world.

Comments are closed.