San Jose State University Meteorology decides burning books they don’t agree with is better than reading them

From the Fahrenheit 451 department comes this indictment of California’s higher education’s “tolerance” for opposing views. When I first got the tip on this, I thought to myself “nobody can be this stupid to photograph themselves doing this” but, here they are, right from the San Jose State University Meteorology Department web page:

SJSU_bookfire

The caption from the SJSU website reads:

This week we received a deluge of free books from the Heartland Institute {this or this }. The book is entitled “The Mad, Mad, Made World of Climatism”. SHown above, Drs. Bridger and Clements test the flammability of the book.

Maybe they just can’t help themselves, note the pictures on the wall.

Here is a screencap of the website relevant section:

SJSU_book_burn

SJSU Meteorology page is here: http://www.sjsu.edu/meteorology/

Fully archived here:

http://www.webcitation.org/6GJvAbb2t

This is the link for book: The Mad Mad Mad World of Climatism

I think Drs. Bridger and Clements have proved the point of the book quite well.

if you wish to comment on their photo, here’s where:

Department of Meteorology
San Jose State University
One Washington Square
San Jose, CA 95192-0104

Voice: (408) 924-5200
FAX: (408) 924-5191

Email: meteorology@sjsu.edu

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

UPDATE: 12:50PM PDT

The photo and caption has been removed – gone from the web page.

http://www.sjsu.edu/meteorology/

But it is permanently archived here: http://www.webcitation.org/6GJvAbb2t

About these ads

338 thoughts on “San Jose State University Meteorology decides burning books they don’t agree with is better than reading them

  1. Think of all the “black carbon” & evil poison gas pollutant CO2 those two will release into the atmosphere by burning so many books.

  2. Those who burn books will eventually burn their people… but only with clean, natural, solar power I would imagine.

  3. Autogodwin.

    But seriously what on earth were they thinking? They might as well just hold up a sign saying “we’re authoritarian closed-minded fools.”

    Once you start burning books to prove a point you lose. You lose because once you start, well, where do you stop?

  4. now Dan if I light this match and we both breathe out co2 this office will have a drought tomorrow with hurricanes and sea level rise.

  5. Pull My Finger:

    True, the Nazis started out filming themselves burning books & ended by filming themselves committing mass murder & burning or burying gassed bodies. Sorry to roll out the old Nazi canard, but in this case the new SS (Settled Science) Greenshirts are asking for it.

  6. Seriously – - where’re their armbands and jackboots?
    Doctorates awarded to those ignorant of even the most basic history. Lessens the value of that degree, that’s sure.

  7. What could they have been thinking? Did they intend to present themselves as Nazis? Do they not know that they are presenting themselves as Nazis?

  8. Wasn’t this the tactic employed by none other than Adolf Hitler and his Brownshirt acolytes to purify the Aryan race? I believe it is. Seig Heil!!

  9. I thought the book was inflammatory enough, inside team circles already.
    Why does the university allow these persons to play with fire? Have they no respect for the forests?
    I have to laugh though, every time I think we have seen how low the team will go, they surprise us with another classy move like this.
    When will they stop? When the bar falls into the hole they are still digging?

  10. In fairness, the book may have been a witch. I hope they weighed it with a duck first just to be sure.

  11. Perhaps they didn’t actually burn the book. The photo only shows them holding a match underneath.

  12. archonix says:
    May 2, 2013 at 11:16 am
    Autogodwin.

    But seriously what on earth were they thinking?
    —————————————-

    Awareness that other people might have conscious minds is likely not a job requirement. Many University professors will attack a mirror thinking it is another professor mimicking them.

  13. What
    Those are people with such little development that they burn books.
    Did nobody tell the University that it is wrong to let children play with matches?

    Where is the Health & Safety Department at that University?!

    Richard

  14. Vince Causey says:
    May 2, 2013 at 11:30 am

    Doesn’t matter. They look like they intend to do it. That image is very powerful.

  15. Nazism is alive and well at San Jose State University.
    Trouble is they’re too dim to realise.

  16. My experience with Academia tells me not to be surprised — no story here — though there should be! (Move along… nothing to see — nothing unusual anyway…!)

  17. Our country was founded with the idea, “I may not believe in what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

    Today is has turned to, “I don’t believe in what you say so I’ll ban and burn it.”

  18. If that’d been in the UK, a full “Risk Assessment” would have had to be carried out prior to the action; and, deliberately starting a fire inside a premises would lead to someone being prosecuted under Health & Safety legislation.

    Starting a fire inside a premises would also give their Insurer cause for concern.

  19. Maybe they were just torturing the book to get it or Steve Goreham to admit funding by Big Oil.

  20. I know Godwins law has been used and abused and has been discussed and disparaged many many times on many sites including this one…But, there is no more perfect fit to use this comparison on, thus in this case Godwins law is not applicable, and comparisons to that regime are thus valid.

    California Uuber Alles

  21. The book
    “The Mad, Mad, Mad World of Climatism”

    The picture
    Mad Climatists burning the book.

    QED.

  22. I am a bit confused about this since Meteorologists are usually not “warm” to the concept of AGW.

  23. What a great advertisement. That is going to be the next book I buy. Thanks for the heads up, San Jose!

  24. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH..who needs skeptics with morons like this?? the only truly sad fact is these morons are employed to educated youngsters.
    If the head of this University had any principles he would sack them as quickly as possible!

  25. Remember when the radicals in Berkeley California were fighting for free speech on campus back in the 60′s? Now that they are in charge, it’s come full circle and the radicals are making certain there is no dissent.

  26. Snake Oil Baron says:
    May 2, 2013 at 11:33 am

    ……………..Awareness that other people might have conscious minds is likely not a job requirement. Many University professors will attack a mirror thinking it is another professor mimicking them.

    That made me spit tea into my keyboard ;-))

  27. Can there be any greater proof that the mad, mad, mad world of climate science is becoming even more insane and desperate? Well, maybe Al Gore’s recent speech might come close: “This is for real. It is not made up. The scientists are not in a conspiracy to lie to us,” Gore nearly shouted. (The Goracle doth protest too much, methinks.)

  28. Perfectly understandable; an unusually cold winter and what with the price of fuel nowadays….

  29. Have a feeling this picture will disappear soon, burning books is just has sooooo not PC,
    Two sophomores could get away with it on the fraternity web pages but not two midlleaged academics on an official web site. Got a little carried away I guess.

  30. Thank you, Anthony for keeping up with all this. I wasn’t aware of the book until I read this post.

    Steve Goreham: The Streisand effect ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect ) works – I just ordered a copy of your book. You are in good company. There is a collection of responses from banned authors:

    http://flavorwire.com/333790/famous-authors-funniest-responses-to-their-books-being-banned

    Mark Twain to his editor on the Concord Public Library banning The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn in 1885:

    “Apparently, the Concord library has condemned Huck as ‘trash and only suitable for the slums.’ This will sell us another twenty-five thousand copies for sure!”

  31. I’m sure they thought staging this photograph would be funny.

    I’m sure they think a lot of things.

  32. Well, this was my two cents:
    –snip
    Dr. Alison Bridger,

    Your advocacy of the burning of books you disagree with is reprehensible, and you should be ashamed of yourself. I can’t begin to fathom what made burning ‘The Mad, Mad, Made World of Climatism’ seem like a good idea, having yourself photographed doing it, and having the photo posted on the San Jose University Meteorology web page. Another movement started with the burning of books by students in University in 1933; perhaps you should consider taking a break from your climate studies and review history. Nothing, and I can’t emphasize that enough, nothing justifies what you are doing.

    I condemn your actions in the strongest possible terms.

    Mark Bofill
    –snip

  33. That web page blows my mind! Here’s the email I just sent to the San Jose State President and Chairman of the Department of Meteorology:

    Dear President Qayoumi and Chairman Bridger,

    As context for this email, I would like to point out that I have a PhD in social science from Northwestern University, with an engineering background, and having taught statistics at the university level. I have carefully studied the climate science for the last 4-5 years because I find it interesting from many perspectives, including the sociology of science, which I spent some time studying as a PhD student.

    I’ve been made aware of the following on your Department web page.

    http://www.webcitation.org/6GJvAbb2t

    I have no opinion of the contents of the book Drs.Bridger and Clements are apparently burning, but the message this picture and caption sends is so wrong-headed and contrary to the purpose of higher education that I cannot believe this is coming from an American University, much less one in my backyard.

    Any thoughtful examination of climate science will reveal two things: (1) that it is debatable whether man-made CO2 has much of an impact on climate — the data are equivocal and the models show no skill, (2) climate science itself has some very serious ethical and professional problems that cast doubt on what one can believe from many climate “scientists.”

    Put my two points aside, however, and your photo and caption suggest that honest questioning of AGW — from a scientific perspective — deserves to be burned. In other words, “Don’t dare question our viewpoint.”

    Is that really the message you want to send to students, prospective students, and the community at large?

    I’m shocked and dismayed.

    Yours truly,

    JP Miller
    Portola Valley, CA

  34. If this picture had ben taken in a cave in the Bora Bora, featuring Godless, anti-Progress, Hate-filled, medieval lunatics burning a book, I would not have been much suprised

  35. Steve Goreham says:

    May 2, 2013 at 11:20 am
    Notice the pictures on the wall. An interest in fire?

    Those pictures must be the other fires they have started. They are obviously proud of them.

  36. I am ashamed to have graduated from SJSU. I have watched in disgust over the years as it descended into the lefty hellhole it has become. The truly sad thing is that this degeneration is so common it isn’t considered remarkable at all.

  37. “Is that really the message you want to send to students, prospective students, and the community at large?”

    Yes. But, it is for the cause …

  38. This can’t be what it looks like.
    Burning books is so wrong… no-one could fall that low in a civilised society. Not again, surely?

    This must be out of context.

    ““Even bad books are books and therefore sacred.” ― Günter Grass

    For some reasons I’m thinking of Germans.

  39. I have a feeling this picture will go down in history as the moment global-warming hysteria jumped the shark.

  40. “Dort, wo man Bücher verbrennt, verbrennt man am Ende auch Menschen”
    Heinrich Heine (1820)

  41. I think they were just demonstrating how peer review works in climate “science”…

  42. There was a long epoch in history when university professors fought strenuously against the burning of books.

    Today, in California, university professors symbolically engage in and encourage the burning of books.

    To anyone who actually lives in California (as I do) this should come as no surprise. The political climate here has marched steadily to the left over the last quarter-century, and has become ever more emotive and hysterical and authoritarian as it has done so.

    It is not at all uncommon to hear affluent Californian urbanites, professionally employed and with university degrees, calmly proposing the forcible suppression of speech with which they happen to disagree. For the greater good, you understand. I suspect that many of these persons would contemplate the image above, and, rather than being horrified by the intellectual regression it depicts, would instead laugh and cheer its intent.

  43. Doesn’t burning things cause global warming? Apparently they don’t think we have enough.

  44. Doesn’t burning things cause global warming? Apparently they don’t think we have enough.

    - Or is this another case of “you can’t do it – but we can do it.”

  45. Snake Oil Baron says:
    May 2, 2013 at 11:33 am

    Hilarious! No doubt all the mirrors were removed long ago by administrators or concerned alumni.

  46. Lighten up, everyone…..
    I mean, it is not as if they will not be putting it into the Library once they have stopped clowning around……
    Oh…..

  47. Anthony writes:

    “Maybe they just can’t help themselves, note the pictures on the wall.”

    Photos from past book burnings?

  48. The photo does not show them actually burning the book, it’s still intact on the photo. And personally I don’t believe they actually burned it, they do not seem to have appropriate tools ready. So my guess is they were rather just fooling around with something like “let’s check how much flame is in this one”. Sorry if anyone feels offended but Heartland is not a scientific institute.
    But I still wonder if they would perform the same test (and publish it on their pages) if someone sent them a copy of An Inconvenient Truth by Al Gore.

  49. I took another look at the picture and can’t stop the chuckles. Remove the captions and with the forest fire photos on the wall and the expressions on those two characters, one would think one is peeping in on a private moment between two pyromaniacs. Pyro porn. Truly ghastly, but an enduring iconic pic.

  50. They need to change the name of the department to Department of Meteorology and Climate Opinion.

    They also need to lose any funding for scientific research, as their results will be automatically biased and hence, useless.

  51. Lets see the faddishly bearded twat burn a koran.

    Come on…I wanna see it.

    Yeah, like eunuchs have no balls.

  52. It doesn’t surprise me, although I do feel dismay. Dismay at their low political and intellectual standards. Is it through such people that the panic over carbon dioxide is sustained?

  53. …Anyway…

    Ive just sieved the other comments and I dont know which is worse, a NAZI burning a book or people too spineless to actually point out that a person who burns a book is, yes, a NAZI.

    The Eco-fascists are clearl;y NAZIs as Ive been saying for ages, and this paints it boldly and unambiguously. . Those two defects are NAZIs. Just repeat it to yourself until you have the confidence to say it out loud. Then come back and show us how bold you can be.

  54. Oh yes, the San Francisco Bay Area which includes San Jose is the belly of the beast. Many, many people here have been brainwashed by the liberal progressive doctrines preached in the universities. These poor people will have to live with this image for ever, a testament to the foolishness of mankind and how little wisdom can resided within the halls of higher learning.

    A picture of the book “The mad, mad, mad world of climatism” being burned; the irony of the situation is absolutely stunning.

  55. I agree with DJ…if the Meteorology Dept at SJSU has any research funding it should be cancelled.

  56. They probably got a lot of funding out of the CO2AGW gravy train, so they try to keep it rolling.

  57. @Kasuha

    The Heartland Institute has a science director:

    http://heartland.org/jay-lehr-phd

    Steve Goreham’s book contains science. That he is an electrical engineer & MBA rather than, say, meteorology PhD, does not IMO matter. Either his arguments & evidence are valid, or not.

    Appealing to academic credentials is to commit the logical fallacy of argumentum ad auctoritatem.

  58. Theo Goodwin says:
    ”What could they have been thinking? Did they intend to present themselves as Nazis? Do they not know that they are presenting themselves as Nazis?”

    This is not the first time. Apparently those in the CAGW camp have little knowledge of history, which explains how they’re so easily duped with “unprecedented”. To anyone familiar with history this was a clear admission to being Nazis:

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/02/20/la-times-invokes-godwins-law-cites-mein-kampf-to-attack-heartland-institute/

  59. It seemed clear to me after Climategate that Warmist propaganda must become increasingly strident, ludicrous, insane. The photo is proof that it has, if the 10-10 video wasn’t enough. The perpetrators of both have unwittingly revealed the sickness within the movement, as well as given us a preview of things to come if they prevail.

  60. Sarah Palin was accused of censoring books containing ideas she did not like, (which later became an accusation that she burned such books), and despite ZERO evidence that she ever did either – she was nonetheless excoriated by leftist MSM as though she had.

    Here, leftists flaunt the idea of burning a book containing ideas they do not like and are likely expecting to be glorified for it by leftist MSM and receive ZERO criticism.

    Liars and hypocrites.

  61. I usually reserve my book-buying to those inexpensive, used tomes I am collecting to discover how the classism of the Poor Laws evolved into the scientific classism and racism of the scientific progressives, and how they joined up with the marxists to develop this new world order of elitist totalitarians saving the world from apocalypic disasater they unoriginally have co-opted from us Christians.

    But this is too good to pass up. I ordered a copy, new. I encourage others to do the same, and at least loan the book out once if not more, just so this little fire stunt back-fires on them.

  62. How about a slow-motion closeup of Al Gore’s “Inconvenient Truth” being stuffed up a Donkey-crat’s hind end? It burns, it burns!

  63. We are moving and downsizing so that I had to dispose of many of the books I have had for years. Some I donated to used bookstores, library if they would take them. Many ended up in the landfill and I felt guilty. Burning a book, even Al Gore’s is just wrong.

  64. Shepherdfj says: May 2, 2013 at 11:54 am
    I am a bit confused about this since Meteorologists are usually not “warm” to the concept of AGW.
    ===============================
    Those people are not working meteorologists. They are teaching tomorrows meteorologists.

  65. John Shade says:
    May 2, 2013 at 12:49 pm
    “It doesn’t surprise me, although I do feel dismay. Dismay at their low political and intellectual standards. Is it through such people that the panic over carbon dioxide is sustained?”

    Yes of course. That’s how they roll. Here’s another one.

    http://notrickszone.com/2013/04/24/schellhnhuber-postpones-warming-another-decade-now-warns-of-8c-warming-by-2200/

    Schellnhuber, like all other warmists/communitarians, thinks that the Earth has a limited carrying capacity. On a good day a communitarian grants 1 bn people the right to live. The other 6 bn? Well they’re a problem you know.

  66. The western world has a problem, as manifested by this action, namely a complete generation that has been indoctrinated instead of being educated. Until that generation grows up and starts being able to think, the problem will continue. Let’s hope that they have the ability to grow up very fast.

    How could we collectively have taken our eye off the ball for so long? I think the answer is that we were too busy making money to care. OK, we made the money – now we are paying for it.

  67. Anthony Watts says: “The photo has been removed gone from the web page”

    April has gone down the Memory Hole. No apologies. No investigation. No explanation. No excuses. Damn, I suppose they’ll cancel tonight’s torchlight parade, too!

  68. If the closed mind climate scientists want to burn the book then it must be worth reading. I’m going to buy several copies and send them to various school age relatives.

  69. Did Anthony’s posting this, and all the comments, force the take down? Most likely, IMHO.

    The sad thing is that they were so stupid to pose for the photo..

    The funny thing is that they were so stupid to pose for the photo.

  70. Glad to see the photo has been removed from the webpage. That was quick (the response must have been strong and hit home – well done, everyone). Now let’s see them make amends and prove they didn’t mean it – by handing out a copy of “It’s a Mad, Mad, Mad World of Climatism” to EVERY student.

    No? I didn’t think so.

    Seriously, I cannot believe they are smiling in that photo. I can NOT believe it! And this is a centre of Higher Education???

    Our “modern” schools and teachers (the world over) teach the destruction of society and civilization. That’s where the war really is, in the school and universities. Talk about the enemy within! That’s where is has to change around. Those individuals are so cocky now, they have become highly visible, which means everyone will be able to see them for what they are. When the reaction starts kicking in, and those fools learn that the whole world is NOT with them in their endeavour to kick over civilization, they might regret becoming so visible.

    …And those idiots are actually smiling while setting fire to a book… Sheesh!

  71. Mike Jonas,

    “…a complete generation that has been indoctrinated instead of being educated. …”

    More like two generations.

  72. “…I cannot believe this is coming from an American University…”

    Based on this last straw of evidence I reluctantly conclude that California is a post-American state, having clearly seceded from the values our declining nation was founded upon. Sadly, my own state of Colorado is apparently succumbing to Mad CA Disease as well, having come under the influence of White House gases as well as vapors of more “doobieous” origin..

  73. Today’s Wall Street Journal has a provacative comment — as reported by the Smithsonian, “Jamestown Colony settlers resorted to cannibalism to survive the harsh winter of 1609 …”

    Thank goodness for our recovery from the little ice age with a bit of global warming. But the sunspot cycle may be predicting the onset of global cooling. Let’s outlaw any future cannibalism before it’s too late

  74. My favorite disparaging term (and one I practically never use) for such people as these book burners is “butt-ugly stupid”. But it’s so offensive I hesitate to use it.

    Yet there’s no better term…

  75. Oops, looks like I mistyped my email address and my comment is stuck in moderation. At the risk of double-posting, I will try again:

    “…I cannot believe this is coming from an American University…”

    Based on this last straw of evidence I reluctantly conclude that California is a post-American state, having clearly seceded from the values our declining nation was founded upon. Sadly, my own state of Colorado is apparently succumbing to Mad CA Disease as well, having come under the influence of White House gases as well as vapors of more “doobieous” origin..

  76. Note the line on the right,”The only good weather is bad weather.”
    Good for a meteorologist, but also good for a climate alarmist.

  77. milodonharlani, “Greenshirts”, thank you. We needed a pejorative label of our own.

  78. Kasuha: “But I still wonder if they would perform the same test (and publish it on their pages) if someone sent them a copy of An Inconvenient Truth by Al Gore.”

    Actually, that title is very difficult to burn because it is all wet.

  79. ug, I am ashamed I went to this school. Somehow I made it out alive and went to Texas. Shame on SJSU. No one takes them seriously though, anyway. Crappy school and everyone knows it.

    I was not aware of the book and I think I will buy one now.

  80. I don’t know, maybe I’m over reacting but this is definitely the most scary thing I’ve seen today, or this week. Perhaps I don’t get out enough. PhD’s burning books. Truth really is stranger than fiction.

  81. IIRC, Bradbury lived in California. … Yep, but southern CA, not San Jose.

    A couple Bradbury quotes and references while Googling:

    http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/b/ray_bradbury/index.html says

    Instead he read everything he could get his hands on, by authors including Edgar Allan Poe, Jules Verne, H. G. Wells, Edgar Rice Burroughs, Thomas Wolfe and Ernest Hemingway. He paid homage to them in 1971 in the autobiographical essay “How Instead of Being Educated in College, I Was Graduated From Libraries.” (Late in life he took an active role in fund-raising efforts for public libraries in Southern California.)

    http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/life/books/story/2012-06-06/ray-bradbury-dies/55417888/1

    It [Fahrenheit 451] was Bradbury’s only true science-fiction work, according to the author, who said all his other works should have been classified as fantasy. “It was a book based on real facts and also on my hatred for people who burn books,” he told The Associated Press in 2002.

  82. Let’s hope that in posting this photo these pitiable “scientists” have lit their own brain-fart. If the university disciplines them (how likely is that?) the punishment should be to read the book and then debate the author in public.

  83. Removal of the photo from the web site denotes second thoughts, but its persistence on the www will remain a haunting indictment of the participating characters and institution in perpetuity.
    Drs. Bridger and Clements appear to have nothing to lose or to gain – maybe one passed over, one at the end of their career?
    As for the academic travesty of book burning, captured so well here:

    http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/triumph/tr-bookburn.htm

    It’ all been done before. These present day perpetrators, apparently knowing nothing of history, not only demonstrate their crassness but the reality of being doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past. This is what it must be to live in hell.

  84. londo says:
    May 2, 2013 at 1:59 pm

    I don’t know, maybe I’m over reacting but this is definitely the most scary thing I’ve seen today, or this week. Perhaps I don’t get out enough. PhD’s burning books. Truth really is stranger than fiction.
    ______________
    Not so sure… news came out today about some sheriff setting up a hotline for citizens to call in and report their neighbors who are thought to be anti- government and speaking of scary cop stories- have you seen the YouTube videos of SWAT- type troops invading houses in Watertown while searching for that bomber?

  85. Notice the “… for Dummies” book on the shelf behind them. Looks like the publisher found the right audience.

  86. With a good logical mind the truth comes from places including books, and for stolen power, they must destroy all truth, so books they now burn. Would have been more effective if they would have just set fire to their computers.

  87. @Jean Parisot,

    You’re welcome. I’m still working on an appropriate symbol & salute for the contemporary SS thugs & mass murderers. Any ideas?

    The Nazis had eugenics & racialism as their anti-scientific religions, just as the anti-human statists have CAGW.

  88. I’m no longer going to scoff at those online university diplomas. Evidently there is a lower form of life.

  89. Nothing weird here. The photo simply shows the arrogance of abusive people getting their way. As old as humanity.

  90. Someone needs to inform them of the correct feedback format for rating books. The book burning Jackboot analogy went out of fashion in 1945.

  91. Peter Kovachev says:
    May 2, 2013 at 12:39 pm

    I took another look at the picture and can’t stop the chuckles. Remove the captions and with the forest fire photos on the wall and the expressions on those two characters, one would think one is peeping in on a private moment between two pyromaniacs. Pyro porn. Truly ghastly, but an enduring iconic pic.

    ========================================================
    8-) You beat me to it! I was going to make a comment on the background pictures also along the lines of them “stoking the fire” to keep their jobs but your comment was much better.

  92. Too many funny comments to thank posters individually, so thanks, all.

    If I were a conspiracy nut, I might suggest that Heartland hired these guys to deflect attention from their Unabomber PR disaster. They should know by now, though, that the mainstream media will never cover this. (Second thoughts: Does Stossel read WUWT?)

  93. Have they learned nothing yet? All this book burning is not really a good idea. I wonder whether the San Jose State University Library has already burned copies of Mein Kampf (if they have/had any)?

    These are the kinds of people we are dealing with here.

    Fascist Ecology:
    The “Green Wing” of the Nazi Party and its Historical Antecedents
    Peter Staudenmaier

    http://www.spunk.org/texts/places/germany/sp001630/peter.html

    Green Lebensraum: The Nazi Roots of Sustainable Development

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/green_lebensraum_the_nazi_roots_of_sustainable_development.html

  94. Sent the following to their email:-

    Burning books is stooping pretty low for a science department.

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/05/02/san-jose-state-university-meteorology-decides-burning-books-they-dont-agree-with-is-better-than-reading-them/

    Burning books is the sort of thing religious zealots normally do, to stop the faithful being contaminated by unsettling ideas.

    Real scientists don’t have to burn books – they can falsify them.

    Regards,
    Eric

  95. I’m pleasantly surprised that no one has mentioned Acts 19:19. In case it comes up, those people burned their own books. They didn’t raid libraries or homes to prevent others from reading what they now considered to be less than worthless.
    I’m sure there is a skeptic or two here that has bought into and burned their own hockey stick.

  96. Book burning? They are only skeptics.. I hear they own everything and all our problems stem from them.. Dirty skeptics are less than human you know.. I would go so far as to say they are genetically inferior.. We should measure their skulls and tattoo them with a smoke stack.. Send them off to reeducation camps.. You know the kind you never return from..

    Sieg Green!

  97. Oh, not at all, Gunga Din, many noticed the fire pics, starting with Anthony. I just found the lead photo hilarious, almost surreal. Dali-esque.

    BTW, DougS, at 12:57 pm made an even better point:

    A picture of the book “The mad, mad, mad world of climatism” being burned; the irony of the situation is absolutely stunning.

  98. Would you pay many thousands of dollars to send your son or daughter to San Jose State University after seeing this photo? Seriously…
    I hope it does immeasurable harm to the University if serious action is not taken quickly against these two morons.

  99. I did a search of the San Jose State University Library catalog and below are a few titles. Do they agree with these books since they haven’t burned them???

    “Mein Kampf / Adolf Hitler ; translated by Ralph Manheim. 694 p. ; Call Number(s): 943.085 Hitler”

    “Race and race history : and other essays / by Alfred Rosenberg ; edited and introduced by Robert Pois.”

  100. It’s San Jose man. If you don’t have papers to roll your stash in, put it in a book and light it up …C California dreamin’ … ah … take a deep breath. ;-P

  101. … I’m sure they were just fooling around on their own time, not while being paid by the taxpayers of California.
    …But think about it… Professors, in a University, .. Burning books??? The mere thought of academics burning books at all wrenches my gut.

  102. No problem with book burning in Acadamia, but if they would have held a gun up to it then they would lose their jobs. Even a paper cut out of a gun would probably have gotten them suspended.

  103. Many, many years ago my older sister asked me to watch her kids. They were at the crawling and just beginning to walk age. And, her voice dripping with delight, she told me, “If they start to choke, pick them up by the feet, upside down, and slap them on the back.” She then left me to experience 45 minutes of sheer terror. I was 18 years old. I envisioned myself spending a lifetime behind bars for manslaughter for failing to perform a medical procedure I had never performed in my life. Any moment the death of her children awaited me if I didn’t save them from choking. I was alone. Inexperienced. Doomed.

    When she finally returned, and I explained this to her she…laughed. To this day she thinks it’s hilarious.

    Because of that experience I endeavored to learn everything I could about childhood behavior. I would never suffer through that again. And one thing I learned was that between the ages of 6 and 8 children become thoroughly infatuated with fire. I smoked back then and they would relentlessly pester me for my lighter, light it, and stare at the winky, flickering flame with a look that could only be described as love. I initially worried (as I had back when I was eighteen) but soon discovered that they would shortly grow out of this. In fact, I observed that this was normal for all children and this fascination with fire would abate by the time they had matured past those ages.

    So, my question is, “What make-up artist did they get for that picture to so convincingly make a pair of 8 year olds look like old adults?”

  104. MLCross says:
    May 2, 2013 at 12:00 pm

    I’m sure they thought staging this photograph would be funny.

    I’m sure they think a lot of things.
    =======================================================
    I am skeptical that they do much if any thinking.

  105. And another thing comes to mind. The two profs could’ve shown a pic of them tossing the book into a trash bin, or better still, one of those recycling things. Instead they exhibited themselves as dreaded CO2 and particulate matter spewing and somewhat demented looking book burners. And that got through a university online mag editorial team. Astounding, indeed.

  106. If someone had some money and wanted to go after these guys easiest would be a getting a few billboards have the picture and then same captions such as,

    “Ever wonder where evidence disproving global warming goes? Professors XXX blah blah and SJSU now”.

    Or

    “Come to SJSU where we don’t debate the facts, we simply show you ways to get rid of them”.

    I’m sure someone who’s good at it could com up with some really nasty ones. Post them on some local billboards and let the WIN begin.

  107. I am embarrassed to have graduated from a university recently. Yet, I am not surprised.

    PS 3-6 inches of snow expected in Kansas City and environs on May 2-3. Warming???

  108. Would you pay many thousands of dollars to send your son or daughter to San Jose State University after seeing this photo? Seriously…
    ——–
    Green attracts many students to the University.. How much money does green attract to the University? How many careers and reputations depend on climate doom?

    They are teaching courses with students expecting to walk into careers based on climate doom..

    So its not surprising they are willing to go to extreme lengths to protect this mann made industry..
    Born, sustained and defended in our Universities.. $$$

  109. You have completely misunderstood them, they are just cold and trying to get warm. They even have pictures of fires on the wall so they can pretend it’s warm.

  110. Good Lord, what complete morons.

    That’s the Meteorology department. If they really have to verify the paper is flammable, they should take the paper to the Chemistry department, where they have proper fume hoods!

    Don’t these people know they shouldn’t play with stuff outside their expertise? What insanity is next, “climate scientists” who do their own statistics, like if they were in the Math department? Who knows what incompetent madness would result!

    Well okay, Mann knows, but he won’t admit to it (yet) so it doesn’t count.

  111. Dan in California says:
    May 2, 2013 at 1:12 pm
    ”Those people are not working meteorologists. They are indoctrinating tomorrows meteorologists.”
    fixed it for ya!

  112. Heartland could not have wished for better publicity. Now more people will want to know what they had to write about. Dumb and Dumbass.

  113. It’s really funny that they would not recognize the fact that, were their lives to be saved by a modern fire suppression system, it would have been made possible in large part by fossil fuels, industrialization, electric power, mining, etc., etc.

    Foolishly oblivious, or obliviously foolish?

  114. People unfamiliar with California politics may find this picture unnerving, but rest assured it is the current policy paradigm. In California we ban everything that offends our superior knowledge. Our politicians boast that ‘California is leading the nation’ in all legislative action concerning the environment. So there you have it, its just another day at the office.

    Of course, we also are progressive enough to backpedal when necessary. Hurt feelings are also banned in California, undoubtedly leading to the removal of said photo when the ignorant whiners complained. Its a tough line to re educate the public and keep them complacent but with our one party system of government its getting easier. Add a couple of sensitivity training classes for the staff and students at SJSU and everything will be just fine.

  115. The connotations with the Brownshirts in Germany in 1935 have been forgotten – obviously

  116. Kinda sad, SJSU had a great engineering department, and I believe a very good school
    of journalism as well….

    However, they were always leaning far left (surprising they didn’t fall off into the ocean…).
    In the late 1970′s there were often demonstrations against the Shah of Iran, which made
    it almost impossible to get any work done (or listen to lectures, or practice music, etc.).
    I leaned out of a window of the music building and replied “down with the Shah,
    sis-boom-bah” but they didn’t get the joke….weren’t listening, weren’t thinking either…
    groupthink, groupspeak, group ignorance….

    Ironically, those demonstrators were at SJSU courtesy of the shah, as out-of-state tuition
    at that time was on the order of $5K a year…goodness knows what it is now….

    To quote Salvor Hardin, “violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.”
    (OK, Isaac Asimov, but it is a good point). Burning books is not only incompetent
    and against the ideals of scholarship and learning, it is downright cowardly.

    These two syncophatic charlatans are merely truthophobes (CO2-ophobes?)…

    Better to light a candle than curse the dark (got that SJSU’lers, CANDLE, not BOOK!)…
    Especially when the book has the truth and good research in it…

  117. No Greenshirt is In uniform without their Hemp-Boots. I guess they find Flint and Steel a little to cumbersome and inconvenient though.

  118. Why did they take the picture down – clearly they wanted to show off the level of their intellect, and their willingness to debate, with a picture. They succeeded, why hide their success?

  119. I laughed out loud when I saw this… Heartland just sent me a copy of that book this week. I’m quite impressed with it.

    I’d bet REAL money that neither of the people in that picture, nor any of their supporters, even looked inside it.

    PS… donate to Heartland, get on their mailing list, get free stuff :)

  120. OT but I will keep it short and simple.

    Guardian – 6 February 2012
    Bill Gates backs climate scientists lobbying for large-scale geoengineering

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/feb/06/bill-gates-climate-scientists-geoengineering

    The Nation – 1 May 2013
    Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. As of December 2012, it had at least $958.6 million—nearly a billion dollars—invested in just two oil giants: ExxonMobil and BP. The hypocrisy is staggering…..

    Did I mention the BBC Pension scheme invests in big oil and tobacco? Never mind.

  121. Do skeptics burn AGW propaganda books? No. They have the authors names printed on the covers. Burning those would be destroying evidence. Not going to happen. None shall escape!

  122. What a sad demonstration of what academia has devolved into.

  123. I just bought the book on amazon. Thanks for the link. Any book the climate mafia is burning is worth reading.

  124. P.S. don’t bitch about it on this web site as they won’t read it. Swamp them with complaints.

  125. Jimbo says: May 2, 2013 at 2:53 pm
    I did a search of the San Jose State University Library catalog and below are a few titles. Do they agree with these books since they haven’t burned them???
    “Mein Kampf / Adolf Hitler ; translated by Ralph Manheim. 694 p. ; Call Number(s): 943.085 Hitler”

    “Mein Kampf” isn’t the greatest read I’ve come across. Seriously, Hitler needed an editor in the worst way..
    .

    sunshinehours1 says: May 2, 2013 at 2:48 pm
    Godwins Law is officially dead. If they burn books and are proud of it, comparing them to Nazi’s is the right thing to do.

    I would never think of comparing Fraulein Dr Bridger or Herr Dr Clements with Nazi’s.

  126. Maybe you misunderstand. Maybe the heater was broken and since it has been so cold lately, they were just trying to stay warm. [end sarcasm]

    Seeing this makes me want to read Fahrenheit 451 again.

  127. As a San Jose State University alumni, graduating with a B.S. in civil engineering, and later receiving my P.E. certificate from the State of California, I was horrified to read of this total act of what amounts to fascist censorship from an academic institution

    I have emailed my complaint to SJSU president Qayoumi at sjsupres@sjsu.edu

  128. Konrad says:
    May 2, 2013 at 4:00 pm

    Do skeptics burn AGW propaganda books? No. They have the authors names printed on the covers. Burning those would be destroying evidence. Not going to happen. None shall escape!

    EXACTLY!!! On WUWT we always struggle with the issue of keeping local copies, archiving on the net etc., does this sound like a group that is afraid of the written word? No. Most of my comments come with quotes from the archives about what they said or have done and sometimes compare. Long live the Internet.

  129. Better Read than Rid!

    I read Goreham’s predecessor edition, Climatism!, and considered it excellent. I recommend it.

    Here’s a thesis (or dissertation?) idea for a grad student: Survey a sample of university libraries–say all the ones whose names begin with an “S”–and report on the ratio of the climate contrarian books they contain to the number of consensus books. Since most of these libraries have online catalogs, it shouldn’t be hard to do.

    Hmm. Maybe the ratio of leftist to rightist books on other topics could be sampled too.

  130. This is the result of decades of mis-education. Education to develop moral character and the intellect has given way to schooling in PC attitudes. Most people don’t – can’t – think these days; they emote. In Australia there is a proposed national curriculum that mandates teaching all subjects through the prisms of indigenous affairs, environmental sustainabilty and something called Asia literacy. That’s not education; that’s brainwashing. Read what John Taylor Gatto has to say about true education: http://www.naturalchild.org/guest/john_gatto.html – it’s beautiful.

    I was going to write to those SJSU morons but you guys have probably shamed them enough.

  131. Jimbo says:
    May 2, 2013 at 4:28 pm

    Long live the Internet.

    We do have a reason to be grateful to Al Gore.

  132. They don’t look like very accomplished bookburners. The finger will be burnt before the paper, but, as Lawrence of Arabia says: “The trick is not minding thart it hurts.”

  133. It is coming apart at the seams.
    One hand, doesn’t know what the other is doing.
    Do you throw a life preserver, or not ?
    The supply is still robust.

  134. Interesting that they’re apparently proud of one of their own participating in —
    November 14, 2012
    Professor Eugene Cordero appeared this week on the Climate Reality Project’s “24 Hours of Reality: The Dirty Weather Report”! Eugene participated in panels 16, 17, and 20 of the 24-hour marathon discussion of global warming and its impacts.

    Following the link to http://climaterealityproject.org/ and then to the linked sub page http://climaterealityproject.org/the-deniers/

    We find
    “Climate deniers are following the exact same playbook as the tobacco companies that once denied that smoking causes cancer. They’re doing all they can to make this confusing for us. But 97 percent of climate scientists understand that climate change is a reality. The scientists are not confused. And we shouldn’t be either.”

    Guess the department is proud to be part of the 97%…

  135. A line in the sand.

    Degeneracy and hostility to civilization on full display. Enemies of Humanity.

    Anyone with any acquaintance with learning or considered thought, on seeing this, will need to make a decision about what they actually are. They might like to see it as an aberration, or explain it away as “a bit of fun”, but this has occurred at what claims to be a university, within a department that plainly sees itself as being at one with wider contemporary intellectual and social mores.

    This is the Now of what “Climate Science” is; and the future of everything else if it prevails.

    There is, I think, a major difference between this and 1933 in Germany as referred to by others above.

    The instinct is the same. And it is a primaeval instinct to advance and prevail without regard to any level of destruction or meaning.

    But it, and AGW itself, is occurring against a very different backdrop. Where in 1933 this was presented as part of a moral rejuvenation, which could not be separated from an economic promise of the same, the situation with AGW is exactly the opposite.

    The peak compulsion attached to AGW, the moral imprecation and demand, happened in 2006/07. That has been on the wane, is nearing extinction, and cannot be revived.

    In addition, it is clear to everyone that AGW far from being a promise of economic rejuvenation, is a very considerable cost that actually undermines basic viability.

    As such, the debased mentality shown in this will find no resonance outside the small circles in which it dominates. I see this as clear evidence that the class of people who embody this are on the cusp of obliteration.

    This should be spread as widely as possible. Show it to everyone. Demand to know where they stand. No equivocation.

  136. Check this out.

    SCSU Celebrates Banned Books Week

    By: Jessica Creighton, Customer Solutions Intern

    Sunday, September 30th marked the kick-off of this year’s Banned Books Week, a week focused on collaborative observance of books that have been either challenged or banned in the past year. In celebration of BBW, as it is affectionately called by librarians far and wide, San Jose State University School of Information Science student groups SLISConnect and ALASC hosted a virtual Banned Books Week Read-Out. The Read-Out, which was led by SLISConnect member Jessica Creighton and ALASC member Dena Gould, featured volunteers taking turns reading from such banned or challenged books as And Tango Makes Three, My Mom’s Having a Baby, The Perks of Being a Wallflower, and Norwegian Wood, among others. The Read-Out also featured the presentation of Banned Books Week poster entries conducted by ALASC. Excerpts read were met with laughter, tears, and a general camaraderie to fulfill the slogan of this year’s Banned Books Week: “Celebrating the Freedom to Read.”

    http://blog.credoreference.com/2012/10/7744/

    One hand not knowing what the other is doing sort of situation, I’m sure.

  137. Totally on-topic (I fear):

    http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2013/05/01/calif-sues-whole-foods-trader-joes-over-lead-found-in-ginger-plum-candies/

    Spending money to regulate quantities of lead in candies, for which I would bet no statistically significant deleterious effects (at these levels) have ever been found, is better for California kids’ brains than spending it on educating them.

    More paying useless people to dig ditches and fill them in.

    As a father of two teenagers here though, I can tell you that the indoctrination isn’t as pervasive as they would like to think it is.

  138. Australian here, but email sent asking for an explanation for this post by the university. Sadly I have sat with doctors and professors in my old university and heard them talk about population control, nuremberg like trails for people who support certain political parties and how if everyone would just agree with them, the world would be a better place.

    I seldom read science magazines or journals anymore because of them.

  139. Apologies to Burt Bacharach and Dionne Warwick….

    Do you know the way to San Jose ?
    I’ve been away so long; I’ve got some books I need to burn.
    Do you know the way to San Jose ?
    I’m going back to find a climate scam I need to turn.

    (True) Science is a great big freeway.
    Honest research and you can buy a car.
    In a week, maybe two, they’ll make you a star.
    Weeks turn into years, how quick they pass
    And all the stars with no hockey sticks
    Are parking cars and pumping gas
    ….

  140. @ papiertigre says:
    May 2, 2013 at 5:26 pm

    Somehow, the message has to got through to young people.

    These “educators” don’t want you educated. They want you trained to service their requirements. They want you ignorant of possibility, and incapable of exercising an autonomous direction. The opposite of education.

    After years of structured indoctrination across anything that touches human behaviour, and with the undeniable failure of these people in creating or maintaining a viable society now becoming vividly evident to young people, perhaps the young are now approaching a point where they have no choice but to call out them out.

  141. Appalling and despicable! This is where “Godwin’s Law” must be suspended — the real problem with Godwin’s Law is that it should only be invoked for IRRELEVANT references to Nazis etc.

    In this case the reference is highly relevant — few movements (even otherwise intolerant ones) in recent history have actually celebrated book burning of “politically incorrect” books.

    Now we have the SJSU engaged in same. It matters not whether or not they actually burned the book in the photo — the photo shows a lit match being held to the book and the caption says “SHown above, Drs. Bridger and Clements test the flammability of the book.”

    This amounts to a celebration and advocacy of book-burning, shouted out to the world on the WorldWideWeb.

    Drs. Bridger and Clements should be TERMINATED immediately, regardless of whether they have tenure or other academic protections — this is a fundamental form of academic and professional misconduct which must not be tolerated at any civilized university.

    btw, tenure is not supposed to be any bar to termination for fundamental, egregious misconduct. It would be most “interesting” to see whether the AAUP (American Assoc. of University Professors) would violate its own professed intellectual standards to defend the jobs of book-burning professors.

  142. I’m an SJSU grad, grad again…and then again….

    I actually took a meteorology course back in the late 1990′s. Decent course. Decent professor. Even held onto the textbook. My son likes to pick it up once in awhile – read it – even use it to identify clouds.

    …then I see this…

    *sigh*

    =8-(

  143. This is what these imbecile professors are invoking:

    1933 book burning, German Students Assn

    Drs. Bridger and Clements may be so ignorant and so devoid of historical understanding that this could come as a surprise to them, but to people with a decent education the very idea of book burnings is an abomination. I despise any so-called “professors” who think that burning books they oppose is any appropriate way to approach academic, scientific, and public life.

  144. This is trivialization of intolerance by these academics, media and proselytes. Ecototalitarians… and the same people would pontificate on how Germans in the 1930s could have not seen, could have fallen for a rising intolerant ideology. Well, trivialization of intolerant behaviours.
    Hansen and co, all the ideologists of the movement will have an historical responsibility should green violence break out.

  145. I emailed Dorothy Poole, SJSU President’s Chief of Staff, and she replied,
    “Thank you for sharing your concerns. The Department of Meteorology and Climate Science has removed the material in question from its website, and regrets what was clearly an ill-conceived attempt at satire. Please be assured the university does not condone book burning for any reason. “

  146. The irony of these eco-fascists and their lame histrionics never fails to amaze me. They cannot learn from either history nor their own failures.

  147. Jeff says:
    May 2, 2013 at 5:29 pm

    Apologies to Burt Bacharach and Dionne Warwick….

    ==============================================================
    8-)

  148. This page and comments is an interesting exercise in evidence free conclusions, and hypocrisy.

    Evidence free because the photo is obviously not a book burning. A closed book with a match held to the spine will no more catch light than will a log in the same situation. Even books thrown into a fire are likely to only burn around the fringes of the page due to lack of oxygen near the spine, so that to burn a book you need either a bonfire or to tear the book up and burn it, effectively leaf by leaf. But Watts and his regular commentors are so keen to vilify that all that passes over their heads. Instead of criticizing the silliness of what is obviously a joke photo, they assume actual book burnings occurred.

    Hypocrisy because whats bans the use of the “D” word on this site because of his false claim that it makes an invidious comparison between so-called “skeptics” and those who deny the deeds fo Nazis. Yet he is happy to host without any issue a large number of accusations that people are Nazis or equivalent to Nazis. Apparently Nazi comparisons only offend Watts when they are directed at him and his allies, even though he finds them so offensive (in that case) that he is offended even when they don’t exist.

    [Reply: I knew there would be an apologist for these book burners. Surprised it took this long. — mod.]

  149. THEY wrap themselves in the actions and trappings of the Nazis, and any one to points that out is berated as stepping in Godwins Law.

  150. To be really effective the University Meteorology Department should team up with the 10:10 No Pressure campaign.

  151. Bob Shapiro says:
    May 2, 2013 at 6:05 pm

    I emailed Dorothy Poole, SJSU President’s Chief of Staff, and she replied,
    “Thank you for sharing your concerns. The Department of Meteorology and Climate Science has removed the material in question from its website, and regrets what was clearly an ill-conceived attempt at satire. Please be assured the university does not condone book burning for any reason. “
    ****************************************************************************************************
    Satire??? LOL. These two clowns and the Dorothy Poole obviously need to attend ‘Satire’ Classes so they can first understand what satire is then maybe they can try their hand at it. Left wing greens wouldn’t know satire if they banged their heads against it.

  152. Stunning!
    The photograph should have been captioned:
    “Dr. Bridger (or is it Clements?) just before their fingers got burned!”

  153. Photo caption:

    Climate scare over. Another warmist professor endorses the burning of fossil fuel

  154. The web page was updated and the picture with caption removed?
    Precisely the thing somebody does to cover up their previous misdemeanours. The misdemeanours that are perpetrated as training for greater crimes.

    Fortunately, it’s archived at http://www.webcitation.org/6GJvAbb2t. Link to it often.

    Remember the method as explained by former ECB chief Jean-Claude Juncker on how it’s managed to erode European society:

    It is a modus operandi of the EU to put something in the room to see if anybody understands it at all or if there’s uproar – and then to proceed.

    Unlike sane people, they seem incapable of judging what is appropriate without “testing”. They are incapable of having a conversation in which they present their ideas and to process the criticism that ensues. They have to put these things into action.

    We must not let this sort of thing get swept under the carpet.

  155. Embarrassing idiots. Obviously renegades, hence the swift disappearance of the page. I trust the university sanctions them thoroughly for their juvenile actions.

    No smoking in the library!

  156. richardscourtney says:
    May 2, 2013 at 3:21 pm

    Because you and Manfred directed us to the history, I want to add that Nazi book burners did not hesitate to abuse book authors. Many professors were threatened, beaten, or abused in other ways and some were murdered. One who was murdered was Moritz Schlick. From Wikipedia:

    “With the rise of the Nazis in Germany and the Austrofascism in Austria, many of the Vienna Circle’s members left for America and the United Kingdom. Schlick, however, stayed on at the University of Vienna. When visited by Herbert Feigl in 1935, he expressed dismay at events in Germany. On June 22, 1936, Schlick was ascending the steps of the University for a class when he was confronted by a former student, Johann Nelböck, who killed Schlick with a pistol.”

    This post is about the Nazis. It is not intended as a comment on San Jose State.

  157. Bob Shapiro says:
    May 2, 2013 at 6:05 pm

    Nice work, Bob. Even today some administrators are on the ball. Kudos to Dorothy Poole. She probably bruised her forehead when she slapped it.

  158. What Fools, Hypocrites, Perverts.

    The ‘Way Back Machine’ likely to have stored a version of their tom-foolery for all to see.

    I for one do not agree with Michael E. Mann, James E. Hansen, The ‘Jones’ of UEA and the Hansen converts at GISS. Yet, I would not commit myself to burn his (their) book (books), however wrong, misinformed, and a lie. Far from it THEM who would commit me to a HELL of their own making. Ha Ha.

    I would however leave his book for all else to read and then know of his own fraud by his own hands.

    “Miranda”

  159. Tom Curtis says:
    May 2, 2013 at 6:13 pm
    This page and comments is an interesting exercise in evidence free conclusions, and hypocrisy.
    ===========================================

    Looks like their superiors didn’t agree with your assessment, even though a good assumption would be that you Tom are an expert in “evidence free conclusions”.

  160. Tom Curtis:

    What an imbecilic comment. If you can’t be bothered to figure out that what is wrong with the implication of the picture, you certainly don’t have any grounds for claiming hypocrisy. There are legitimate analogies – this certainly qualifies.

    Mark

  161. philincalifornia:

    Tom is a master at straining credulity. Not a bright one, however. Pushing the Lewandowsky issue, he actually demonstrated that Cook more idiot than liar.

    Mark

  162. Tom Curtis – you know I have a fair amount of respect for you, so I’ll just say this plainly. You point is ill-conceived and petty. Whether they are actually burning the book is not the point. It is their display of intent that is the issue. And that is very, very clear. Whether they actually burned the book or not is irrelevant – it is their demonstrated mindset that is a true problem.

    We know full well their action, symbolic or real, reflects their beliefs.And that is a serious problem. Any person., let alone an academic, that thinks even a symbolic display of book burning is acceptable has no business in a teaching or research position.

    And removing the page as was quickly done does NOT remove the beliefs these people have demonstrated.

    It is inexcusable to even play around with this – for the very reasons noted by many here. It is entirely appropriate to bring up Nazi book burnings – they were nearly identical context as the demonstrated beliefs of these two idiots – destroy that which you disagree with.

    The criticism was proper and just.

  163. I see NO reason for kudos to the admin for removing the page. Kudo’s would be deserved if there was public disciplinary action associated with the infraction.

  164. TOM CURTIS,
    imagine what would happen if you and your lot at SKS were coming to power;
    the world would be a better place wouldn’t it?
    what great fun!

  165. This is appalling and an embarrassment to SJSU. Be sure to send an email with your thoughts on SJSU advocating book burning and the stifling of debate to the President of San Jose State University at sjsupres@sjsu.edu

    They need to post a signed apology on their Department web page.

    The actions of Drs. Bridger and Clements are appalling, offensive and shameful to those of us who attended that university.

  166. Folks, this is a growing problem. A federal law was passed just last year allowing the U.S. president to arbitrarily censor out of existence any website he wishes to shut down. By decree.

    Thus, the Dark Ages return…

  167. Old Age Pensioners in the UK have been burning books for a few years now – top keep warm during the cold winters we’ve been having.

  168. The state of higher education is an outrage. San Jose State University is a closed shop; they would never hire a Republican. It’s outrageous that conservatives must pay taxes to fund instutions that hate them and would never hire them/

  169. Mark T,

    You may be correct. I may be wrong. This is probably what I was remembering.

    But it is only a matter of time, no? Obama wants that authority, doesn’t he?

  170. Maybe someone has mentioned this already but…

    I noticed the following in the caption:

    “This week we received a deluge of free books from the Heartland Institute {this or this }.”

    So who is WE?? Perhaps someone should contact the Heartland Institute to see eaxctly who from SJSU ordered the material. I would NOT have expected that someone with any ethics (or sanity) in academia would order some reading material from an organization like Heartland for the expressed purpose of creating “satire” on the official school website…

    Finally, one must ask the question – Don’t these people have anything better to do?? The school is already reaming the parents and students royally for tuition and fees that they probably wont be able to pay back in full because they are so damn high! Can’t the schools at least hire faculty who are mature and have a sense of duty to their jobs as educators??!!

  171. Tom Curtis says:
    May 2, 2013 at 6:13 pm

    —————————————————-

    Do you really want to soil your reputation as a truth-seeker by defending this kind of buffoonery with specious arguments as to whether or not the photo actually depicts an attempt to burn books?

    You’re better than that. You are lowering yourself.

  172. The book title is not “Mad, Mad, Made….”
    I think it’s “Mad, Mad, Mad….”
    cn

  173. Louis says:
    May 2, 2013 at 11:57 am
    Can there be any greater proof that the mad, mad, mad world of climate science is becoming even more insane and desperate? Well, maybe Al Gore’s recent speech might come close: “This is for real. It is not made up. The scientists are not in a conspiracy to lie to us,” Gore nearly shouted. (The Goracle doth protest too much, methinks.)
    —————————
    Yeah, wasn’t it Al Gore who said “This is serial, man”
    And something about a man-bear-pig.
    Or was that a sex poodle?
    I believe that’s what I recall.
    YMMV
    cn

  174. Frank K. says:
    May 2, 2013 at 12:24 pm
    I think they were just demonstrating how peer review works in climate “science”…
    ———————–
    Good on ya!

  175. MLCross says:
    May 2, 2013 at 12:00 pm
    “I’m sure they thought staging this photograph would be funny.

    I’m sure they think a lot of things.”
    —————————-
    I’m sure they think a lot of things that are wrong.
    Hope that helps.
    Now I fully agree.
    cn

  176. I knew the US had had a long cold winter, but do they still have to burn books to keep warm?

    It also suggest that San Jose State University lack smoke detectors in their buildings. Try burning a book in most modern offices and you’d either get a fire engine rolling up, or automatic sprinklers raining down.

  177. jorgekafkazar says:
    May 2, 2013 at 1:25 pm
    Anthony Watts says: “The photo has been removed gone from the web page”

    April has gone down the Memory Hole. No apologies. No investigation. No explanation. No excuses. Damn, I suppose they’ll cancel tonight’s torchlight parade, too!
    —————-
    No, I believe it was a cross lighting parade, wasn’t it?
    cn

  178. Wamron says: “Lets see the faddishly bearded twat burn a koran.”

    I will resist the temptation to Photoshop that into existence. It is tempting though.

  179. dbstealy:

    But it is only a matter of time, no?

    No. The US Constitution stands in the way of such an act, even if a law is passed.

    Obama wants that authority, doesn’t he?

    Like any tyrant, I’m sure he does.

    pottereaton:

    You’re better than that. You are lowering yourself.

    No he’s not. He’s a believer just like any other that occasionally lifts his head out of the sand for the sake of appearance. The only “truth” people like Tom Curtis are interested in are the ones that can easily be obfuscated to mean whatever is necessary when challenged. Nuthead’s nonsensical spoutings were too easy to be shot down, so Tom had to get in a dig to make sure it looked like he was honest. Don’t be fooled – comments like his above are exactly what he is about.

    Mark

  180. Don says:
    May 2, 2013 at 2:03 pm
    Let’s hope that in posting this photo these pitiable “scientists” have lit their own brain-fart. If the university disciplines them (how likely is that?) the punishment should be to read the book and then debate the author in public.
    ———————————————
    Hear, hear, now that would be true and honest justice.
    cn

  181. The world of climatism is indeed mad. And the evidence keeps mounting. Supermandia, blowing up kids, pal review, Lewendowsky, Gleick… and on it goes. You can’t make this stuff up. Now this. And have you read the reviews for the Mad Mad Mad World book on Amazon? A bunch of so-called scientists jump on there saying they haven’t bothered to actually read the book but other “scientists” agree that “climate science” is universally accepted so the book has to be total junk – don’t read it. They are figuratively burning a book they have never read. Of course these two idiots are literally (trying) to burn a book they most assuredly have never read. Anyway I’m sure enjoying the displays of ignorance and willful blindness that permeates the CAGW crowd. And that Tom Curtis. Isn’t he great? Such a great tradition in the CAGW community of demonstrating their stupidity by defending the indefensible. Very amusing. Keep trying Tom. I’ll wait up for you.

  182. Hot under the collar says:
    May 2, 2013 at 2:25 pm
    Someone needs to inform them of the correct feedback format for rating books. The book burning Jackboot analogy went out of fashion in 1945.
    ————————————-
    Isn’t the proper format two thumbs down if you really dislike the book?
    cn

  183. Ah, yes, those Bay Area people. Just because they may have been there a long time, doesn’t mean they are any smarter than a box of rocks. Once upon a time, it was a great place to be. Anyone remember Edelweiss Dairy? How about the Stanford Indians? Or orchards along El Camino between Palo Alto and Mtn. View, no buildings? The Dream was zoned beyond reach by people who got their piece and wanted to make sure nobody else could get theirs. Smug, arrogant, and amazingly empty.

    Now the same people are destroying the rest of CA to make it a big park just for themselves. They’ve already started closing Yosemite – to keep out the masses of proles, leaving it for the elites. You can be certain, they want to get us out of all the ‘nice’ places, and eventually the whole State. I guess we can have Nevada instead. Or maybe worker hives?

    Back to the topic…. How can so many dumb people be put in charge? It only happens if you are trying to wreck the place deliberately, or you are delusional.

  184. Jay says:
    May 2, 2013 at 3:17 pm
    …………………. How many careers and reputations depend on climate doom?

    They are teaching courses with students expecting to walk into careers based on climate doom..

    So its not surprising they are willing to go to extreme lengths to protect this mann made industry..
    Born, sustained and defended in our Universities.. $$$
    ————————————————————–
    omg
    I’d never thought of that.
    I fear you are too correct.
    cn

  185. My email to SJU:

    Thank you for the picture of San Jose Professors Dr. Clements and Dr. Bridger threatening to burn the book “The Mad, Mad, Mad World of Climatism”.

    Any book that is important enough to be burned by The Establishment, even in jest, is probably required reading. I will be purchasing a copy myself.

    I’m hoping that this picture is enough to get this added to the American Library Association’s “Banned and Challenged Books” list, where the importance of the book will be highlighted.

    Again, thanks for the reference.

    RDCII

  186. A Scott, the criticism is only proper and just if it distinguishes between fact (two people posted a joke picture of a “book burning”) and fantasy (two people actually burnt some books because they disagreed with their contents). The former is merely idiotic and no more invites comparisons to Nazis than it does comparisons to Hume, who famously wrote:

    “If we take into our hand any volume; of divinity or school metaphysics, for instance; let us ask, Does it contain any abstract reasoning concerning quantity or number? No. Does it contain any experimental reasoning concerning matter of fact and existence? No. Consign it then to the flames: For it can contain nothing but sophistry and illusion.”

    Indeed, comparisons with the Nazis are severely over blown in that the Nazis did not burn just their own copies of the books, but all copies of the book they could find. Nor were the Nazis alone in spirit in that regard in WWII, with the allied occupation also listing and destroying millions of books in Germany in 1949. I see no comparisons of Bridger and Clements with Eisenhower above, but that comparison is at least as apt as any comparison with Hitler.

    Unless you are determined to put the worst possible face on the actions of Bridger and Clements, they are correctly criticized for showing graphically, and an in inflammatory way that they consider the Heartland Institute books worthless as science. But no, Watts falls over himself to make an accusation of actual book burning (of which there is no evidence); and his commentors quickly trot out the Nazi comparisons which Watts is delighted to host.

  187. An appropriate caption for this picture:

    Climate Scientists at Work.

    Really, that’s all that is needed, and it’s not even incorrect. They published this on a University website; they used university resources. This “speech” was delivered not as private citizens, but as representatives of the University on a University website. The University itself confirms this by removing the picture..

    Climate Scientists at Work.

  188. I think Steve should add the picture to his Amazon page as an example of what’s been said for quite some time.

    They have no boundaries. From dropping live looking polar bears from the sky to eliminating deniers at the push of a button. They have select editors, hidden contrary views, refused to debate. Now they’re demonstrating they are willing to burn books rather than allow the information to be offered in their library even in the adult section with pornography.
    Any questions? Read the book.
    And they’re madder than we thought.
    °
    cn

  189. @tom curtis

    ‘Evidence free because the photo is obviously not a book burning’

    H’mm

    A flame put to the book and a caption about ‘testing its flammability’.

    Of course it’s not a book burning, Tom. Just a couple of kids playing with matches…….

    Apart from the fact that the one on the left is Professor Alison Bridger, Chair of the Department of Meteorology and Climate Science, and the one on the right is Craig Clements, Assistant Professor.

    http://www.met.sjsu.edu/~clements/

    http://www.met.sjsu.edu/~bridger/whoami.htm

    Judging by her CV, Bridger must be approaching 60 y.o. and Clements in his mid to late 30s.
    One might have hoped that such ‘distinguished academics’ (I use the term advisedly) had grown out of pranks that ten year olds might get up to.

    Or do they both have rampant pyromania..and this is their normal coffee break amusement?

  190. This Tom Curtis guy really is puffed up about himself isn’t he? Isn’t he the one over at SkS that wrote he wanted to rip Anthony’s throat out and do vile unspeakable things to his body? Pot, kettle and all that.

    I think he’s just as puffed up with self importance as the wannabe Fahrenheit 451 professors

  191. “Thank you for sharing your concerns. The Department of Meteorology and Climate Science has removed the material in question from its website, and regrets what was clearly an ill-conceived attempt at satire. Please be assured the university does not condone book burning for any reason. “

    An American university is reduced to assuring us they don’t condone book burning…that’s how low our institutions of higher learner have fallen.

    Here’s the last time the Warmists tried to put on a sense of humour.

    The face of human evil is always banal and oh so sincere.

  192. @Tom Curtis


    A Scott, the criticism is only proper and just if it distinguishes between fact (two people posted a joke picture of a “book burning”) and fantasy (two people actually burnt some books because they disagreed with their contents).

    Please explain the ‘joke’. You seem to be the only one who understands it. Where is the humour? At which point should I ROFLMAO? Where is the ‘satire’?

    And if it’s so bloody funny, why did the ‘university’ see fit to remove it?

  193. Tom Curtis:

    Do you believe Book Burning is a subject that professionals should joke about? It’s not really about whether they burned the book or not, but about their message that burning the book is even an appropriate thought. Are you defending the burning of this book, even in jest, as an appropriate expression for university professors and professional Climate Scientists? You really owe us an answer on this, since you’ve made a fuss.

    More importantly, “hypocrisy” is a very double-edged sword.

    Does SkS have a blog policy that allows deletion or snipping of emails? Then complaining about Watts having a posting policy is hypocritical.

    Do you, personally, use the “D” word? If so, complaining that posters here use the “Na” word is hypocritical squared.

    Remove the Sequoia from thine own eye first, dude. Until then, your complaints only serve to highlight your own hypocrisy.

  194. Do you say a joke, Tom Curtis? You need to clean up your sense of humor. These are the people who call us “deniers”. Do also think that is funny?

  195. Did they burn this report written by the EPA’s own technical analysis? It appears they are not aware of the observations and analysis that supports the ‘skeptics’. It appears they are trying a bait and switch tactic to distract the public from this obvious problem with the extreme AGW theory.

    http://www.drroyspencer.com/2013/04/global-warming-slowdown-the-view-from-space/

    http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/endangermentcommentsv7b1.pdf

    “Technical Support Document for Endangerment Analysis for Greenhouse Gas Emissions under the Clean Air Act”
    “I have become increasingly concerned that EPA has itself paid too little attention to the science of global warming. EPA and others have tended to accept the findings reached by outside groups, particularly the IPCC and the CCSP, as being correct without a careful and critical examination of their conclusions and documentation. If they should be found to be incorrect at a later date, however, and EPA is found not to have made a really careful independent review of them before reaching its decisions on endangerment, it appears likely that it is EPA rather than these other groups that may be blamed for any errors. Restricting the source of inputs into the process to these two sources may make EPA’s current task easier but it may come with enormous costs later if they should result in policies that may not be scientifically supportable.
    The failings are listed below in decreasing order of importance in my view: (See attached for details.)
    1. Lack of observed upper tropospheric heating in the tropics (see Section 2.9 for a detailed discussion).
    2. Lack of observed constant humidity levels, a very important assumption of all the IPCC models, as CO2levels have risen (see Section 1.7).
    3. The most reliable sets of global temperature data we have, using satellite microwave sounding units, show no appreciable temperature increases during the critical period 1978-1997, just when the surface station data show a pronounced rise (see Section 2.4). Satellite data after 1998 is also inconsistent with the GHG/CO2/AGW hypothesis 2009 v
    4. The models used by the IPCC do not take into account or show the most important ocean oscillations which clearly do affect global temperatures, namely, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, and the ENSO (Section 2.4). Leaving out any major potential causes for global warming from the analysis results in the likely misattribution of the effects of these oscillations to the GHGs/CO2 and hence is likely to overstate their importance as a cause for climate change.
    5. The models and the IPCC ignored the possibility of indirect solar variability (Section 2.5), which if important would again be likely to have the effect of overstating the importance of GHGs/CO2.
    6. The models and the IPCC ignored the possibility that there may be other significant natural effects on global temperatures that we do not yet understand (Section 2.4). This possibility invalidates their statements that one must assume anthropogenic sources in order to duplicate the temperature record. The 1998 spike in global temperatures is very difficult to explain in any other way (see Section 2.4).
    7. Surface global temperature data may have been hopelessly corrupted by the urban heat island effect and other problems which may explain some portion of the warming that would otherwise be attributed to GHGs/CO2. In fact, the Draft TSD refers almost exclusively in Section 5 to surface rather than satellite data.”

    “2.9 The Missing Heating in the Tropical Troposphere
    Computer models based on the theory of GHG/CO2 warming predict that the troposphere in the tropics should warm faster than the surface in response to increasing CO2 concentrations, because that is where the CO2 greenhouse effect operates. Sun-Cosmic ray warming will warm the troposphere more uniformly.

    The UN’s IPCC AR4 report includes a set of plots of computer model predicted rate of temperature change from the surface to 30 km altitude and over all latitudes for 5 types of climate forcings as shown below.

    The Hadley Centre’s real-world plot of radiosonde temperature observations shown below, however, does not show the projected CO2 induced global warming hot-spot at all. The predicted hot-spot is entirely absent from the observational record. This shows that most of the global temperature change cannot be attributed to increasing CO2 concentrations.”
    Did they try to ban the publication of this paper that notes the tropical tropospheric warming a key prediction and a necessary condition (the tropical surface region warming is from long wave radiation from the tropical tropospheric) of the extreme AGW theory is 300% less than what is predicted?

    http://icecap.us/images/uploads/DOUGLASPAPER.pdf

    “ A comparison of tropical temperature trends with model predictions
    We examine tropospheric temperature trends of 67 runs from 22 ‘Climate of the 20th Century’ model simulations and try to reconcile them with the best available updated observations (in the tropics during the satellite era). Model results and observed temperature trends are in disagreement in most of the tropical troposphere, being separated by more than twice the uncertainty of the model mean. In layers near 5 km, the modelled trend is 100 to 300% higher than observed, and, above 8 km, modelled and observed trends have opposite signs. These conclusions contrast strongly with those of recent publications based on essentially the same data.”
    Did they try to burn or ban the publication of this paper that findings again that rather than amplify CO2 forcing planetary clouds in the tropics increases or decreases to reflect more or less energy off into space (negative feedback as opposed to amplification). Based on this top of the atmosphere radiation analysis vs ocean temperature changes the warming due to a doubling of atmospheric CO2 will result in less than 1C warming. The 1.5C to 5C warming predicted by the IPCC general circulation models requires amplification not

    http://www.johnstonanalytics.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/docs/LindzenChoi2011.235213033.pdf

    “On the Observational Determination of Climate Sensitivity and Its Implications by Richard S. Lindzen and Yong-Sang Choi
    We estimate climate sensitivity from observations, using the deseasonalized fluctuations in sea surface temperatures (SSTs) and the concurrent fluctuations in the top-of-atmosphere (TOA) outgoing radiation from the ERBE (1985-1999) and CERES (2000- 2008) satellite instruments. Distinct periods of warming and cooling in the SSTs were used to evaluate feedbacks. An earlier study (Lindzen and Choi, 2009) was subject to significant criticisms. The present paper is an expansion of the earlier paper where the various criticisms are taken into account. … … We argue that feedbacks are largely concentrated in the tropics, and the tropical feedbacks can be adjusted to account for their impact on the globe as a whole. Indeed, we show that including all CERES data (not just from the tropics) leads to results similar to what are obtained for the tropics alone – though with more noise. We again find that the outgoing radiation resulting from SST fluctuations exceeds the zerofeedback response thus implying negative feedback. In contrast to this, the calculated TOA outgoing radiation fluxes from 11 atmospheric models forced by the observed SST are less than the zerofeedback response, consistent with the positive feedbacks that characterize these models. …. … CO2, a relatively minor greenhouse gas, has increased significantly since the beginning of the industrial age from about 280 ppmv to about 390 ppmv, presumably due mostly to man’s emissions. This is the focus of current concerns. However, warming from a doubling of CO2 would only be about 1C (based on simple calculations where the radiation altitude and the Planck temperature depend on wavelength in accordance with the attenuation coefficients of well mixed CO2 molecules; a doubling of any concentration in ppmv produces the same warming because of the logarithmic dependence of CO2’s absorption on the amount of CO2) (IPCC, 2007). This modest warming is much less than current climate models suggest for a doubling of CO2. Models predict warming of from 1.5C to 5C and even more for a doubling of CO2. Model predictions depend on the ‘feedback’ within models from the more important greenhouse substances, water vapor and clouds. Within all current climate models, water vapor increases with increasing temperature so as to further inhibit infrared cooling. Clouds also change so that their visible reflectivity decreases, causing increased solar absorption and warming of the earth. …”

    I must admit that I am not laughing at policies that will turn Western countries into third world countries. I would highly recommend reading Christopher Booker “The Real Global Warming Disaster: Is the Obsession with “Climate Change” Turning Out to Be the Most Costly Scientific Blunder in History?’.

    I just finished reading the Oxford professor, Dieter Helm’s “The Carbon Crunch: How we’re getting Climate Change Wrong – and How to fix it”

    Helm states that the warming could be from any where from 1C to 5C. No discussion of the observations that support the 1C.

    What he acknowledge is that the billions upon billions of dollars spent by the EU on ‘green’ scams such as the construction of wind farms in Germany in regions where the wind does not blow. (21.7% average). As the wind blows when power is not required and large highly efficient combine cycle power plants (efficiency 60%) that cannot be turned on and off , must be replaced with single cycle plants (efficiency 40%) that can be turned on and off. If one includes the CO2 to construct the wind farm, to transport power from the wind farm and to step up the wind farm power and match it the electric grid and the reduction in efficiency of the other grid power plants there is almost no CO2 reduction.

    With a real power factor of 21.7% a 1000 of the largest wind turbines are required to replace a single coal generating plant. In addition, there must be 100% backup single cycle natural gas power plants to back up the 1000 turbines. (Sound expensive, inefficient? Perhaps that is the reason why cost of electrical power in Germany is twice that of the US.) As the EU bans fracking and there is a shortage of local natural gas in the EU, the Germans are hence constructing coal plants as imported coal is cheaper than imported natural gas.

    As Helm notes if one includes the carbon dioxide required to produce the goods and materials the EU purchases from Asia and the US there has been no net reduction in CO2 emissions in the EU. The local reduction is due to the fact the goods and materials are no longer manufactured or produced in the EU.

    Helm notes the most of the EU plans to shutdown their nuclear power plants as the ‘green’ movement is fanatically anti nuclear.

    Helm hints at the fact that there is no possibility of any real reduction in CO2 emissions without a massive increase in nuclear power.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22372088

    Trillion-euro shortfall facing EU energy sector – Lords Committee
    Investment totalling a trillion euros (£846bn) is required before the end of this decade if the European Union is to stave off an energy crisis.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20002801

    Coal consumption in Europe, where governments have been at the forefront of the push to curb carbon dioxide emissions, has risen sharply in recent years.

    Why? Because it’s cheap, and getting cheaper all the time. Due to the economic downturn, there has been what Paul McConnell, senior analyst at energy research group Wood Mackenzie, calls a “collapse in industrial demand for energy”. This has led to an oversupply of coal, pushing the price down.

    In fact, coal was the fastest growing form of energy in the world outside renewables last year, with production up 6% on 2010, twice the rate of increase of gas and more than four times that of oil. Consumption data paints a similar picture, while figures for this year are set to tell the same story.

  196. The posting is dated but not timed, but the first comment is at 11:15 am, so probably it was posted not too much before that. Note Anthony’s update at 12:50. These people reacted very quickly, indeed. This is pretty good testimony to the world-wide influence of this website.

    San Jose State has finally found a spot on the map. What a way for an academic institution to gain world-wide notoriety! Book Burning!

  197. Tom Curtis says:
    “Bridger and Clements….. in inflammatory way …..consider…… book burning.”

    Is there any other way?

  198. @ Tom Curtis says:
    May 2, 2013 at 11:36 pm

    I don’t know anything of you apart from the above and that, recently, you featured in discussions about Cook at Climate Audit. I gather you are in some way associated with SkepticalScience.

    At CA you were congratulated – by some – on the basis that you were bringing a sincere attention to Cooks actions, and that this was demonstrated by your willingness to acknowledged these were “unbelievably stupid” or some such. But that really it must have just been a “mistake” based on an “memory lapse” about something absolutely basic to his activities. And this surely was the explanation.

    I see the same mentality and procedure here.

    In both cases the manner of delivery is one of sincere interest and readiness to accept a considered and reasonable conclusion. Which just happens to be one that exonerates.

    You are in the business of creating illusions.

    The obviously apparent is the only realistic conclusion in both these cases.

    Whilst the style may differ your aim is the same as for others. You are not an apologist as someone referred to you above, you are an advocate. Your personal temperament no doubt favors your approach.

    You defend the indefensible even if it appears that you are not actively hostile to the truth. But you are. Your methodology in doing so is a ruse.

    A variation of presentation that forms part of and gives flexibility to the whole.

    It is clear that you will excuse and justify anything. On the flimsiest of or non-existent grounds.

    People can see through you. And more and more will as you continue to expose yourself.

  199. Tom Curtis sorry but your not in the land of the cartoonists and his lap dog now , here you have to deal with all facts even those that don’t agree with you . Of course a good start would be to point out what was actual ‘wrong’ with the content of the book , rather than just smear by association . Which although a widely use approach for AGW supporters , is not one which carries much weight outside here.

  200. Kasuha says:
    May 2, 2013 at 12:35 pm

    “The photo does not show them actually burning the book, it’s still intact on the photo. And personally I don’t believe they actually burned it, they do not seem to have appropriate tools ready.”

    Wow, you spotted it was really just a joke, which of course it was, one of those “aren’t we superior in showing you how we feel about people who disagree with us”. No way were they going to burn it over their office desk, maybe later in the playground, but that isn’t the point, it is the symbolism.

    You also say “The Heartland Institution isn’t a scientific body”. What has that got to do with the price of bread this Friday morning?

  201. Mr Curtis:
    From your own blog:
    “But if not a scientist, what am I? By training, I am a philosopher, with a particular interest in ethics, logic and epistemology (in that order). Unfortunately due to a combination of ill health, financial stress and family commitments, I have not been able to pursue a career as a philosopher. This could be regarded as an ironical test of my ability to be philosophical.

    My stunted career has had one benefit. It has given me the time to study privately and very intensively first evolution, and now global warming. This has given me the opportunity to become knowledgeable, but not expert.

    As is purported to have said, “An expert is someone is someone who knows some of the worst mistakes that can be made in his subject, and how to avoid them.” Given this definition, I am certainly not expert on climate change. I am likely to make bad mistakes from time to time, so (and this should never need saying) do not believe anything just because I have said it.

    However, I have made and seen made some very bad mistakes in climate science, and have learnt from the process. And I know from hard experience that the level of public exposition of climate science is generally woeful. Therefore, I think I have something to contribute. I have no doubt, however, that my biggest contribution is in my list of blogs (most of whom are both more credentialed, and more expert than I in climate science) and to sites for the raw data.”

    A review then, of your list “credentialed” websites shows nary a one with demnonstable science. You even list “The Stoat”, fer crying out loud. I truly empathise with the consequences of your health issues, but…
    You claim yourself to be a philosopher, and a student of science, but the text above, and your chosen reading list shows that you are neither. What you are, is an individual who has cloaked himself in the mantle of confirmation bias and called it truth..While philosophers are notorious for rationalizing moral and ethical ambivalence, they normally can appreciate the broader implications of societal and individual gestures and reflect on them in a more expansive perspective. How could you miss that?

    There is a delicious irony in the dichotomy of philosophy and science: While many scientists are philosophers, few philosophers are scientists. Understanding the nature and origins of “facts” always leads to bigger questions and a greater sense of scale of the complexity of the world. If you want to be a philosopher, be a scientist first. You can only approach the answer to the question of what is truth, when you begin to understand what is not.

    Shake off your mantle of bias and join the conversation here at WUWT. The truth is out there….[cue theme] for you to discover.

  202. Can the picture be put on billboards around every campus in the country?

    Give the students something worth thinking about.

  203. There are AGW fanatics defending book burning. Or even more disturbing rationalizing it.
    Wow. Just, wow.
    And of course big media ignores it.
    Not surprising, but even sadder.

  204. Tom Curtis says:
    May 2, 2013 at 11:36 pm
    “Indeed, comparisons with the Nazis are severely over blown in that the Nazis did not burn just their own copies of the books, but all copies of the book they could find. Nor were the Nazis alone in spirit in that regard in WWII, with the allied occupation also listing and destroying millions of books in Germany in 1949. I see no comparisons of Bridger and Clements with Eisenhower above, but that comparison is at least as apt as any comparison with Hitler.”

    Ok, let’s bring on some Eisenhower comparisons then.
    “God I hate the Germans, why, because the German is a beast” [Eisenhower]
    1.5 million Germans perished in Eisenhower camps

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Bacque

  205. There’s such a staged feel to this. Look at the picture. On the far left, on the shelf, there’s a Greeting Card. The card portrays robed figures carrying torches toward an erupting volcano. Sort of Druidic.

    That’s three instances of inappropriate, incongruent to the room, pictures of fire.

    Did they decorate the office just for this picture? It seems like it.

    But why would they do that?

  206. Tom Curtis says that this was a joke.
    He has no evidence for that assertion. I doubt the book can be produced unburnt.
    But perhaps he knows something of their mindset. So I will address him as the expert who sees so much more deeply than me.

    If it was a joke, Tom, please explain this.

    1 What is funny about pretending to be Nazis?
    2 Is it funnier when you play “Burn the Books” or “Gas the Jews”?
    3 Is it really funnier than just extracting the urine out of stupid arguments you see on the page?

    Because I find the last one very funny indeed.

  207. CodeTech says:
    May 2, 2013 at 9:46 pm

    “Frank K, Heartland sent me one for free. I assume they sent a few around.”

    Right – so why would some professor in academia, who obviously has no interest in reading anything the Heartland Institute produces, go ahead and request a copy of a free book? Was it so they could have some laughs on the official SJSU University website? Makes no sense – but then these people apparently have no (common) sense.

    Anyhow, perhaps someone at the Heartland Institute has a record of who at SJSU ordered the book.

  208. Tom Curtis says:
    May 2, 2013 at 6:13 pm

    This page and comments is an interesting exercise in evidence free conclusions, and hypocrisy.

    Evidence free because the photo is obviously not a book burning. A closed book with a match held to the spine will no more catch light than will a log in the same situation. Even books thrown into a fire are likely to only burn around the fringes of the page due to lack of oxygen near the spine, so that to burn a book you need either a bonfire or to tear the book up and burn it, effectively leaf by leaf. But Watts and his regular commentors are so keen to vilify that all that passes over their heads. Instead of criticizing the silliness of what is obviously a joke photo, they assume actual book burnings occurred.

    Hypocrisy because whats bans the use of the “D” word on this site because of his false claim that it makes an invidious comparison between so-called “skeptics” and those who deny the deeds fo Nazis. Yet he is happy to host without any issue a large number of accusations that people are Nazis or equivalent to Nazis. Apparently Nazi comparisons only offend Watts when they are directed at him and his allies, even though he finds them so offensive (in that case) that he is offended even when they don’t exist.

    ——————————
    Oh. It was a joke. Burning books.
    Ha.
    Ha.
    Ha.

    Wow Tom, that was a good one. What’s the encore? Photos of kids in concentration camps?

    /sarc

    What a feeble argument. You tell me a photo of parties holding a lit match under a book is obviously not a book burning. Sadly, this is typical of the level of contorted rationalization I expect from AGW apologists.

    I’d sooner be photographed drunk in full drag than be photographed in the same room as someone holding a match to a book. Some things really are fundamentally obscene.

    I’m too disgusted to properly rip you the new rectum you deserve. You should rethink this.

  209. I read above that you claim some basis for being considered a philosopher.

    You a PHILOSOPHER?

    You claim to be familiar with LOGIC?

    You dare to assert an interest in ETHICS?

    Is your interplay with these things calculated to undermine them? Or is that just inadvertent and born of your incapacity to be otherwise?

    You give sophistry a bad name.

    PHILOSOPHER? Don’t insult humanity.

    I’d suggest developing a habit for honesty but that is beyond learning.

    God save the world from this degradation.

  210. @ Amr marzouk says:
    May 3, 2013 at 4:47 am

    “It is better to burn a book than curse the darkness”

    ——————————————————————————————————————–

    What, another “philosopher”?

    Of the Imbecile Gnomic School this time?

    Redolent of the dignity of Sages Long Dead?

    The Pious Nodding in Prostration at This Evident Truth?

    A book would be of no use to you. Your standard of being condemns you to the darkness of a cave.

    No point to a book if you can’t see. No point to anything you can’t touch if you can’t interpret anything beyond your immediate reach.

    Primitive.

  211. Emailed:
    I saw that two of your professors apparently published a joke online, pretending to burn a skeptical climate book.
    http://www.webcitation.org/6GJvAbb2t (archived)
    http://www.sjsu.edu/meteorology/ (original)
    I am just outraged. Book-burning?! Is it possible that they are not aware that book-burning was a symbol of the Nazis, and was a direct precursor to their burning of people as well? What kind of a “joke” is this? Would they have thought it was funny to put on Hitler Youth uniforms while they did it?
    I grew up in California, and did college work in the Bay Area. I have a number of family members who died in the Holocaust, and I cannot believe that professors at a California university think that Nazism is a joke.

    (Update) Now I see that the picture has been removed from the original website. All to the good, but it in no way mitigates the egregious insensitivity involved.

  212. Not to defend them from charges of rank stupidity (which they clearly exhibit), but I have to hope this was just a photo setup without intent to actually burn the book. You’ll notice that they’re holding it over a wooden table, in an office full of books and journals, without any fire-proof receptacle visible nearby. The windows behind them seem to be closed, and the female prof is applying a small match to the spine of the book – not the fastest or safest way to set a book on fire. And then there’s the misspellings on the website: “”The book is entitled “The Mad, Mad, Made World of Climatism”. SHown above, Drs. Bridger and Clements test the flammability of the book.””

    Interestingly, one of the books on the shelves behind them is a “for dummies” book. Pity the title is blocked by the guy’s arm. I’m guessing it might be “arson for dummies.”

  213. Tom Curtis once again shows his extremely eccentric integrity filter.

    Upon occasional moments he shows flashes of righteous indignation, toward various subjects.

    Yet, confronted with the loathsome spectacle of academic scientists joshing on the web about burning a book they find inconvenient, Curtis applies his righteous ire not to the fans of book burning but to those who would criticize such a deed.

    It matters not whether the two academics went ahead with the ritual book burning which they were proud to display upon their own department’s university website. The implication of the photo and caption is that those two people consider book burning of books they view with hostility as a worthy activity.

    Proclaiming to their university and the world that they ought to burn such books is the core f their deed. It is in no sense satire. I have not known anyone in my lifetime to advocate burning books as an expression of disapproval (certainly there are masses of books which are pulped otherwise destroyed when their physical quality has deteriorated badly). The key aspect is advocacy of book burning based upon disapproval of the contents, and that is indeed what these two “academic scientists” (sic) have done.

  214. Tom Curtis says:
    May 2, 2013 at 11:36 pm

    “Indeed, comparisons with the Nazis are severely over blown …”
    “I see no comparisons of Bridger and Clements with Eisenhower above …”

    Tom, I did not compare the action of Dr. Bridger and Dr. Clements to Nazi book burning. I compared them to the actions of Mao’s Red Guards during the Cultural Revolution. Since the absolute majority of the Red Guards were students I thought it was a good analogy to rooting out harmful ideas at San Jose State University.

    I am glad you made the comparison with Eisenhower yourself. It explains your thinking. You must reason that more appropriately Dr. Bridger and Dr. Clements play the role of conquering Allied forces eradicating Nazi-like concepts among wrong-headed and dangerous population.

  215. Speaking of satire; the subject of two university professors thinking it would be a good idea to pretend to be burning a book that blew their ideology out of the water would be a great one for Josh. The irony is palpable. The glee on their faces obvious. Priceless.

  216. “Golden says:
    May 2, 2013 at 12:27 pm
    Doesn’t burning things cause global warming? Apparently they don’t think we have enough

    Don’t be silly. Of course we have enough books. New bookshops are opening weekly, if not daily, and established bookshops are still extant, this proves the hypothesis that books are a renewable resource and therefore carbon neutral. ;)

  217. (Let’s all chant together, now…)

    Hey! Hey! San Jose!
    How many books have you burned today?

    Kinda’ takes ya’ back to the 60′s, eh?

  218. Maybe they just can’t help themselves, note the pictures on the wall.

    Umm … is that her trophy wall? Scary to think these people hold such power.

  219. You HAVE to wonder about the University that would hire people like this and give them *teaching* jobs!

  220. Re: Tom Curtis comparing book burning in a democratic society with the Allied policy of “de-Nazification” in the late 1940s:

    The comparison is preposterous, offensive, and disgusting.

    The topic and context for the SJSU profs. is,

    1). “What is appropriate behavior and defense of civil liberties in a constitutional order with a (more or less) civil democratic society?”

    The question facing Eisenhower and the Allies in 1945 onwards was,

    2) “In the wake of the most destructive war in human history (60 million killed by some estimates), which the Nazis (primarily) launched in concert with their fellow Axis (fascist) powers, what is the most appropriate way to restore and enhance civilized values in a place full of the hateful genocidal propaganda which motivated and shaped this horrific war?”

    One can certainly debate the merits of any particular temporary policy aimed at “de-Nazification” in the 1940s, but to make a simplistic comparison, as Tom Curtis has done, displays a stultifying ignorance and level of moral obtuseness.

  221. Skiphil says:
    May 3, 2013 at 11:46 am

    “Re: Tom Curtis comparing book burning in a democratic society with the Allied policy of “de-Nazification” in the late 1940s”

    “… most destructive war in human history … which the Nazis (primarily) launched in concert with their fellow Axis (fascist) powers …”

    As a minor point, I’d rephrase your sentence this way:

    “… which the Nazis launched in concert with their fellow totalitarian power, the Soviet Union, by their staggered attack on Poland in September 1939 …”

    I agree, of course, with your comment about the preposterousness of Tom Curtis’ comparison—I made a similar point just a little earlier. It suggests that people who express skepticism about the CAGW science and policy prescriptions deserve to be treated like German Nazis after WWII.

    Do you also wonder what Tom Curtis thinks about Nuremberg-style trials for “climate skeptics”?

  222. Tom Curtis ….

    I continue to strongly disagree with your position. In this case there is zero difference between the metaphor of burning these books they use, and actually doing so. The end result is identical. It is their absolute, clear, intent to show that the book should be burned, as it – in their opinion – has no merit or value. Physically burning the book would produce no different result, and is not necessary to convey the message they portray.

    They clearly show their belief the book should be burned, which is no different than actually doing so. For all the reasons shown by the comments here – It is not a “joke” to demonstrate your belief a book you disagree with should be burned. That these two alleged academics saw nothing inappropriate in their actions shows they do not hold the necessary level of ethics and intelligence that would qualify them for the positions they hold.

    You often want to find excuses, to show bad behavior in the least offensive light – and brush off these examples of terribly bad behavior and ethics as being of little import or consequence. I respectfully say you are wrong. Actions do have consequences.

    And here, while it may be easy to brush off as a silly joke gone wrong – these are alleged academics and professionals. And the very premise of their actions is so wrong, their bias and disrespect for opinions of others so clearly displayed, that I believe they should be disqualified as unfit, from their positions.

    I do not make that statement lightly, nor from a position of bias. If a “skeptic” had undertaken the same actions my answer would be exactly the same. Some things are not a joke. And if a professional academic is unable to understand where that line lies on something as clear as this, then their demonstrated lack of judgement and ethics here, should lead to the question of their judgement and ethics in their work as well.

  223. This incident reminds me of something that happened 40 years ago when I was a student at an engineering college.

    I was standing in front of a urinal between two mathematics professors, one on each side, and casually asked the question of them, “I wonder ….. does the time a man spends standing at a urinal fit the normal distribution, or does it instead fit the exponential distribution?”

    Instantly, there was a heated argument between them as to which probability distribution it might be, and why.

  224. Wow, Tom Curtis follows up by proving my point about his utter ignorance. pottereaton, do you agree, yet? Just curious, yours is usually a respectable opinion.

    Mark

  225. Colorado Wellington:

    Your post at May 3, 2013 at 1:13 pm says

    As a minor point, I’d rephrase your sentence this way:
    “… which the Naz1s launched in concert with their fellow totalitarian power, the Soviet Union, by their staggered attack on Poland in September 1939 …”

    I know many Americans think Holly wood won that war and that the US ultra-right thinks H1tler was a misunderstood ‘good guy’, but your assertion is ridiculous.

    Germany was expanding.
    Britain warned Germany that if the expansion were to include an invasion of Poland then Britain would declare war on Germany.
    In 1939 Germany did invade Poland so a state of war existed between Britain and Germany.
    Following further successful expansions (i.e. France, Greece, etc.), in 1942 Germany invaded the USSR.
    Japan made a sneak attack on US territory and Germany fulfilled its alliance obligations with Japan by declaring war on the USA.
    The US and USSR allied with Britain and its allies in the war with Germany.
    In July and August 1943 the USSR defeated the German invasion of the USSR at the battle of Kursk.
    USSR forces then chased the German forces westwards back towards Germany, and on the way the USSR annexed countries – including Poland – which it took from Germany.
    On 6 June 1944 allied forces including many US forces invaded northern France from southern England.
    These allied forces freed France from Germany then chased German forces eastward back towards Germany.
    The advance from the west prevented the USSR taking all of Germany and possibly continuing an advance further westward. Instead, the USSR. USA and Britain decided how they would share the countries freed from Germany.
    Poland was one of the countries which the allies agreed would be ceded to the USSR.

    Richard

  226. Frank K. says:
    May 3, 2013 at 5:46 am

    CodeTech says:
    May 2, 2013 at 9:46 pm

    “Frank K, Heartland sent me one for free. I assume they sent a few around.”

    Right – so why would some professor in academia, who obviously has no interest in reading anything the Heartland Institute produces, go ahead and request a copy of a free book?

    I suspect Heartland may send free copies of books (especially if it published them) to libraries. It mails unrequested pamphlets / newsletters weekly to state and national legislators.

  227. I live in the San Jose area. My children will be starting college in a few years. San Jose State will not be considered for my children’s education.

  228. Philosopher Ayn Rand said something to the effect that to counter your enemy you have to understand their argument.

    However, such people as book burners can’t do that, because:
    - they aren’t sound thinkers, thus:
    o cannot understand others
    o cannot argue their case
    - they believe people are gullible (a self-fulfilling presumption?) so need to be protected from other viewpoints

    Keep in mind these are people who have rejected reason. Their beliefs are emotionally based, not validated. The only methods they have available are screaming, lying, and force.

  229. To those wondering how the idiots got Heartland books, recall that Heartland sent one to David Suzuki who returned it with a nasty note. Return postage paid by the foundation he claims to not be part of.

  230. richardscourtney says:
    May 3, 2013 at 11:46 pm

    “I know many Americans think Hollywood won that war and that the US ultra-right thinks H1tler was a misunderstood ‘good guy’ …”

    Huh? Where did that come from, Richard? I will assume it was not directed at me.

    “… but your assertion is ridiculous.”

    No, it is not ridiculous, Richard, but I don’t want to continue this tangential argument on Anthony’s blog. It distracts from his post about the weird happenings at San Jose and Tom Curtis’ curious defense of the same.

    My main point was joining Skiphil’s protest of Tom Curtis’ preposterous comparison of San Jose State professors’ treatment of Heartland with Allied denazification of Germany.

    Concerning the start of WWII: Can you think of a different forum where you’d like to continue our discussion?

  231. Colorado Wellington:

    At May 4, 2013 at 3:47 pm you ask me:

    Concerning the start of WWII: Can you think of a different forum where you’d like to continue our discussion?

    No, I can’t. And I see no reason to discuss my factual statements that said

    Germany was expanding.
    Britain warned Germany that if the expansion were to include an invasion of Poland then Britain would declare war on Germany.
    In 1939 Germany did invade Poland so a state of war existed between Britain and Germany.

    You made a preposterous assertion and I outlined the history which shows it was preposterous in my post at

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/05/02/san-jose-state-university-meteorology-decides-burning-books-they-dont-agree-with-is-better-than-reading-them/#comment-1296836

    Richard

  232. richardscourtney says:
    May 4, 2013 at 4:16 pm

    “You made a preposterous assertion and I outlined the history which shows it was preposterous …”

    OK, Richard. Facts:

    - Molotov and von Ribbentrop signed the Treaty of Non-Aggression between the Soviet Union and Germany on Aug 23, 1939.
    - The treaty contained a secret protocol, including the partitioning of Poland, in Articles I. through IV.
    - Germany invaded Poland from the west on Sep 1, 1939.
    - The Soviet Union invaded Poland from the east on Sep 17, 1939.
    - A joint victory parade of Wehrmacht and Red Army was held in Brest on Sep 23, 1939.
    - The secret protocol of the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact was modified in the Soviet-German Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Demarcation on Sep 28, 1939.

    *) http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact.html
    **) http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/addsepro.asp
    ***) http://www.lituanus.org/1989/89_1_03.htm

  233. The science is settled…we will accept on further viewpoints…Gee, think what medical advances we could make with this new interpretation of the scientific method…

  234. Sorry Richard Courtney, your post of May 3, 2013 at 11:46 pm is so full of errors that it is of no use.

    #1 – USSR did invade Poland on September 17, 1939. Stalin specifically used the “Hitler-Stalin Non-aggression pact” as the excuse. The USSR annexed the eastern third of Poland.
    #2 – Germany invaded the USSR in June 1941, not 1942
    #3 – The “Hitler-Stalin” Pact was actually the Ribbentrop-Molotov treaty that made the USSR and Germany allies. That treaty was broken with the invasion of the USSR.
    #4 – The allies never “gave” any lands or countries to the USSR. Like the other major allies, each was given a responsibility to administer the former Axis countries and the conquered ones and re-establish self governance. A duty the USSR failed to carry out, instead installing puppet regimes in all of them, and creating a greater USSR called The Warsaw Pact.

    As for your battles, historians generally agree that the siege of Stalingrad was the turning point in the eastern theater. Kursk was a major victory for the USSR, but Stalingrad was when the tide turned.

    Stop excusing the USSR. Stalin knew full well what he was getting into with Hitler, he just was buying time before HE invaded Germany. He lost the time battle.

  235. Book burning is a fairly common response throughout our history by those setting up dictatorships of one kind or another, political, religious, a simple and exciting method of uniting to a common cause and establishing an enemy to be united against, controlled violence, and as noted, ends in burning people.

    Sometimes that initial step isn’t applicable and they go straight to burning people, where the majority of the population are uneducated the educated themselves are directly targetted – Russia, China and Cambodia recent examples – under the pretext that these are out of touch somehow with the common man, but in reality to achieve the same effect, for the wannabe dictators to rid themselves of educated vocal opposition to dumb down the population, the easier to control them through ‘re-education’ techniques.

    So what’s the connection to that now after two world wars and one world cup and the WWII argument?

    Well, there’s this: http://de.slideshare.net/SiriusDisclosure/william-jasper-global-tyranny-step-by-step-the-united-nations-and-the-emerging-new-world-order-272p-20008978

    When the Soviet’s proclaimed there were no longer any political prisoners and the Chinese still butchers of their people proclaimed for “human rights,” “peaceful coexistence,”and “social tranquility,”.

    “But Kempster didnt stop there,adding: “If adopted … the plan would mark the transformation of the Security Council from a Cold War-hobbled debating society to an organization with the power to enforce its decisions….”17 Even more chilling! But not, apparently, to the apostles of one-worldism who have been lustily cheering suchproposals.In the months following the summit, as the Bush Administration moved brazenly forward with never-announced plans to supplant the U.S. Constitution with the UN Charter, the Establishment news media,dominated by members of the Council on Foreign Relations and led by the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, and the CFRs own Foreign Affairs, provided both cover andsupport. So began the audacious propaganda campaign to resurrect a decades-old, one-world scheme totransfer U.S. military might to the United Nations.In its March 6, 1992 lead editorial entitled “The New World Army,” the New York Times came close to dropping all pretenses and subtlety:”

    And since then the Patriot Act and so on, bringing American people into the control by the same mindset.

    ‘You Americans are so gullible. No, you won’t accept communism outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of socialism until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism. We won’t have to fight you. We’ll so weaken your economy until you’ll fall like overripe fruit into our hands.’ Kruschev http://www.awakeandarise.org/article/FabianWindow.htm

    The Fabians have become expert at infiltrating all areas, through education and creating controlled opposition in pushing their green agenda to population control and destruction of private property and the rest:
    Fabian history: http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/05.09/revisionism.html

    And this Fabian input from the likes of Blair and Gore and other more recent players: https://www.lifeinthemix.info/2012/03/profile-fabian-society/
    “Fabian Socialism, Communism, Marxism and Fascism, are ‘all birds of the same feather.’ They all worship the same deities, have the same socialist beliefs, the same goals, but have different ways in getting there. Of all types of socialism, Fabian Socialism is by far the most insidious of all. Fabian Socialism is a subtle mixture of both communism and fascism, but unlike communism and fascism, which are directly confrontational and revolutionary, Fabianism deceptively aims to achieve the same objectives “gradually” through consensus with the “will” of the people, and use force only as a last resort.

    “Because of this “gradual” approach it is much more insidious as it is often difficult to recognise in its early stages”

    Which piece comes back full circle to the argument about WWII – “Today, led by the British aristocracy, members of the Fabian Society and London School of Economics, it is not the Marxist Five Year Plan, military thugs and secret police of Stalin that farmers have to worry about. It is now the British Fabian “fascist” policies of City of London Corporation multi-national corporations and banks (that are now wealthier than many countries) in collusion with the UN, that are monopolising farming and food distribution on a global scale, that are disenfranchising the small, private “middle-class” farmers out of their livelihood and driving them off their properties…… ”

    The same banking cartel behind the curtain in the Wizard of OZ which destroyed the US farmers, the same banking cartel who usurped the Russian Revolution, (Lenin’s ‘you may think I’m in control, but someone else is driving the car’), the same banking cartel who financed Hitler and France and Britain and Russia in the extension of the first world war, which is pulling all the strings now. And they don’t give a damn what you believe or which political party you belong to, it’s all the same to them and they created some to add to the mix.

    Britain didn’t go to war because of German expansionism, it went to war because the whole shebang was organised by the banking cartel, who moved on from financing both sides in wars between nations, to creating the wars to finance both sides..

    and the people pay the interest on the borrowed money which the bankers create out of nothing. http://100777.com/node/298

    How they got the second world war up and running according to a video here, which I’ve only just come across and haven’t watched, so putting it in for interest: http://iraqwar.mirror-world.ru/article/280670
    How the US & British Banking Cartels Funded Hitler
    “In 1939, Czechoslovakia had an accumulated 6,000,000 million pounds (British currency pounds, maybe?) of gold deposited in the Central BANK OF ENGLAND that had its account in the BANK FOR INTERNATIONAL SETTLEMENTS ( BIS ) transfer $6,000,000 million pounds of gold into the REICHSBANK of Germany.

    Bank Of International Settlements ( BIS ), Bern, Switzerland, Schweiz, Suisse, Swiss, Franc, Schacht, Schacht & Company, Reichsbank, Berlin, Germany, Dresner Bank, Wehrlibank, Marc, Austria, Bank Of England ( BOE ), London, England, Montague Norman, Westminster Bank, Barclay’s Bank, Pound, Sterling, Federal Reserve Board, Federal Reserve Bank, Washington, D.C., United States Of America, Central Bank, U.S. Treasury Department, Department Of The U.S. Treasury, Dollar, Morgenthau, Ostrander, Mikesell, JP Morgan, Chase Bank, Bank Of Japan ( BOJ ), France, Madrid, Spain, Bretton Woods, McKittrick ( U.S. lawyer ), Butterworth, Gold, Bullion, Intelligence, Agents, 22, Tons, Tonnes, Metric, 290,000,000 million, Butterworth, Basel. Central Bank Gold Bullion War Reallocations Part 2 of 5 ”

    There is only one reason these academics thought it a great laugh to make their opposition statement in the manner they did, because they are not educated to think for themselves as the “greenie agenda” has become their only reality.

  236. Nothing we say here will have any affect on Dr. Alison Bridger. She’s the Chair of the Department and enjoys lavish lifetime benefits. From her webpage at SJSU: http://www.met.sjsu.edu/faculty/bridger.html
    People – Faculty / Staff – Alison F. C. Bridger
    Alison F. C. Bridger
    Professor & Chair
    Phone: (408) 924-5206
    Fax: (408) 924-5191
    Email: alison.bridger@sjsu.edu
    Address:
    One Washington Square
    San Jose, CA 95192-0104
    Ph.D. in Atmospheric Science, 1981, Colorado State University
    M.Sc. in Meteorology, 1975, Reading University, England
    B.Sc. in Mathematics, 1974, Sussex University, England
    Research focus: large-scale atmospheric dynamics … Earth and Mars
    Teaching focus: undergraduate & graduate atmospheric dynamics and numerical prediction
    And, here’s her Home Page: http://www.met.sjsu.edu/~bridger/

  237. philjourdan:

    Your post at May 4, 2013 at 6:49 pm says to me

    Stop excusing the USSR.

    I have not, I do not, and I will not excuse the USSR; never, not ever.

    I deplore ALL totalitarianism including that of the USSR.

    Withdraw your offensive remark and apologise.

    Richard

  238. philjourdan:

    Also, in support of your abusive and untrue remark, you list 4 points which you claim I made and you are refuting. I made none of those points.

    You have demonstrated why I said there was no reason to discuss such matters.

    Richard

  239. So gute litle Nazis. die furher wäre stolz auf dich. vielleicht kannst du ihm anzuschließen, in der Hölle

  240. They must be those Puritan book-burning Christians we hear about so often. The pics on the wall, just another way of saying they’re homesick.

  241. Remember it’s not about Climate. It’s about control and a weird religion…if I may re-introduce how it will soon be.

  242. I notice their spelling and use of uppercase is indifferent at best. Typical products of the US educational system…

  243. Maybe if people had done their research instead of merely calling them nazis would know that Dr. Clements is recognized internationally as a fire weather expert, which explains the pictures, and Dr. Bridger is an accomplished researcher. Since I’ve yet to see anyone with the credentials to make a good argument for why the book is relevant, please humble yourselves people and respect science until YOU can publish work disproving decades of research. Just because you can’t comprehend the dynamics of the atmosphere doesn’t mean you are suddenly an expert on climate change.

  244. Atmospheric Scientist?

    As if.

    “A.S.” says:

    “Since I’ve yet to see anyone with the credentials to make a good argument for why the book is relevant, please humble yourselves people and respect science until YOU can publish work disproving decades of research.”

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

    You don’t see because you are not looking. The proprietor of this website, and many other contributors here are published, peer reviewed authors.

    So, what are your peer reviewed publications? Post your C.V. here.

  245. Atmospheric Scientist:

    At May 5, 2013 at 11:23 am you write

    Maybe if people had done their research instead of merely calling them nazis would know that Dr. Clements is recognized internationally as a fire weather expert, which explains the pictures, and Dr. Bridger is an accomplished researcher. Since I’ve yet to see anyone with the credentials to make a good argument for why the book is relevant, please humble yourselves people and respect science until YOU can publish work disproving decades of research. Just because you can’t comprehend the dynamics of the atmosphere doesn’t mean you are suddenly an expert on climate change.

    Whether or not people “comprehend the dynamics of the atmosphere” (many here do) is not a reason for them to accept the actions of people who do NOT “respect science” by advocating burning books.

    Your failure to assess the book or to read opinions of it by people with “credentials” is not relevant to what these people did.

    And the expertise of the two miscreants is also not relevant.

    These people are unfit to teach the young because – by their act – they have displayed the antithesis of academic thought. They should be dismissed from the university immediately.

    I am not surprised that you have not put your name to your post. I, too, would be ashamed to have my name associated with such views as you have expressed.

    Richard

  246. @ Atmospheric Scientist says:
    May 5, 2013 at 11:23 am

    You’re not very high functioning are you?

    Head in the clouds? Oxygen deprivation?

    You managed to miss the entire point – everything – about the post and comments?

    Didn’t register at all?

    The “internationally recognized fire expert” and her “accomplished” sidekick know exactly which books require burning?

    Did you think this was a book review discussion to be followed by a frenzy of destruction?

    Then followed by abasement before a photo of your gurus?

    And YOU understand the dynamics of the atmosphere?

    Could you inform “Climate Scientists” please, they obviously don’t know.

  247. Boomers are such dorks. They “questioned authority,” and utilized the new ethic, “if it feels good do it.”

    But what were our poor Deep Thinking Progressives to do when their two greatest axioms collided? What were they to do when they discovered Authority just Feels Good?

    The answer is “Transcend Reality.”

    Third Way politics are so “Transcendent” that Boomers’ Authority can Feel Good and you, the lucky Americans raised and educated by Boomers, don’t need the “Reality” of personal liberty anymore. Third Way politics are actually too wonderful to reveal to people all at once, so it has to be concealed and implemented in incremental steps. But Boomers just know you are going to love it. However, there is a little problem with asymmetrical information availability, which can cause parties to disagree about things and become uncivil, so we just need to get rid of some of these asymmetrical books, and asymmetrical healthcare plans, and asymmetrical cultural traditions, etc..

  248. If you are an ‘atmospheric scientist’, you would know no one named “Dr. Bridger is an accomplished researcher”. She did not publish papers for a long long time. You apparently do not know what is the standard of international expertise, and thus consider this book burner is one. Wait a minute, are you one of them?

  249. It’s been more than a couple of hours now, “Atmospheric Scientist”. Where is your C.V.? I expected it to be posted by now [if you are really legit].

    We should have a chance to review your C.V., since you have falsely denigrated people who comment here as lacking credentials. So post your C.V., “Atmospheric Scientist” — and then readers can decide if you are credible — or not. Because for all we know, you could be a high school graduate, intending to enroll in Wymyn’s Studies.

  250. Assuming they didn’t actually burn anything, wouldn’t it be interesting to find out what they did with the books? Are they in the trash, did they return them, perhaps they’re holding up a desk somewhere? I don’t imagine they actually put them on the shelves after their little attempt at fun…

  251. Book burning, how appropiate, old age pensioners in the UK have resorted to buying cheap books to burn in their stoves as extremely cold winter are getting harsher and longer, a special effect of global warming were told!

    Froze to death by global warming, a Manniacal phrase if there ever was one.

  252. Well-paid tenured professor, department chair, book burner, and future pensioner (I believe she’s in her 60′s) Dr. Alison Bridger might glance at the following article which details California’s $1 trillion public debt, including vast unfunded pension obligations for civil servants like Dr. Bridger: http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2013/05/californias-statelocal-governments.html#yY9xEi8Fa2IrZ4rk.99 . When CalPers (the state pension fund) needs more cash to pay pensioners their lavish pensions and benefits, CalPers gets that cash from the General Fund, i.e. the taxpayers. In a few years, your tax dollars will support Dr. Alison Bridger’s $80,000 per year pension and health plan.

    Everyone should read the following article about female teachers grading female students higher than male students for equivalent workproduct: http://www.fathersandfamilies.org/2013/03/15/two-studies-show-one-cause-of-boys-educational-failure-their-teachers/

  253. “Atmospheric Scientist says:

    May 5, 2013 at 11:23 am”

    Living a fire prone country, Australia, I have never heard of a “fire weather expert”. Certainly heard of a fire *ecology* expert however (Which I understand CA is similar). Of course, if “fire weather” in CA is anything like it is in Australia you quickly discover that “fire weather” is, most of the time, created by arsonists.

    “Eugene S Conlin says:

    May 3, 2013 at 10:41 am”

    Al Gore did invent the internet didn’t he? ;-) I guess the point I was making it matters not how many books are burnt, they are, mostly, available digitally. All this stunt does is draw attention as to why they want to burnt it. There is no such thing as bad press to raise attention on a book that might ordinarily go un-noticed. I’d say thank you SJSU for raising attention to the book and at the same time confirming what most, rational thinking types who have or have not studied science, understand to be the alarmists position on the claim humans are changing climate in a bad way from the ~3% of ~390ppm/v CO2 given that we know changes in CO2 *FOLLOW* changes in temps by ~800 years.

  254. richardscourtney says:
    May 5, 2013 at 3:29 am

    You have demonstrated why I said there was no reason to discuss such matters.

    I stayed out of this debate for the most part as I failed to see how it had anything to do with the topic. Your libel of the American right was ignored. I ignored it until you responded to Colorado Wellington @May 3, 2013 at 1:13 pm, in which he stated:

    “… which the Nazis launched in concert with their fellow totalitarian power, the Soviet Union, by their staggered attack on Poland in September 1939 …”

    And you responded (even quoting him) with: “but your assertion is ridiculous.”

    So I made point #1. If you are not denying Point #1, then perhaps you should not quote point #1, and then say it is both an assertion and ridiculous. Both of which are patently false.

    Second, you clearly stated: “in 1942 Germany invaded the USSR.”

    I corrected you with point #2. Germany invaded in 1941, not 1942. There is nothing to apologize for there. Period.

    Third, I was clarifying Colorado Wellington’s statement of “the Nazis launched in concert with their fellow totalitarian power” which demonstrated that Stalin was not only in bed with Hitler, but apparently, for his own gain, fully supported his policies. I did not claim you made the point #3, I was proving that Hitler was not right, but left wing.

    Finally, as regards point #4, it is a direct refutation of your allegation that “Poland was one of the countries which the allies agreed would be ceded to the USSR.” The allies did no such thing, as point #4 clearly demonstrates.

    So if anything, I have but one thing to apologize for, and that is claiming you are defending the USSR. I will gladly do so when you can either further explain your denial of Colorado Wellington’s point, and stop libeling the American Right. Indeed, the only time the American Nazi party has been in the news in the past 10 years in regards to politics is when they came out in support of Cindy Sheehan, a far left flake. They are merely an offshoot of the American left as can clearly be seen in both their rhetoric and support.

    I greatly respect your breadth and depth of knowledge on the climate issues here. However, you have either misstated or been in error on your knowledge of history.

  255. @ Atmospheric Scientist says:
    May 5, 2013 at 11:23 am

    The way I read it he is sayin the only possible way to remove the book burning Neo-Nazi movement from the California University system is by [trimmed, Mod]

    • richardscourtney says:
      May 3, 2013 at 11:46 pm

      I know many Americans think Holly wood won that war and that the US ultra-right thinks H1tler was a misunderstood ‘good guy’, but your assertion is ridiculous.

      You now have 2 things to either explain or apologize for before I will reciprocate. As was explained to you many times, it is the ultra left that idolizes H1tler as PROVEN by their love of Cindy Sheehan who is left of Nancy Pelosi. This was the remark you made in this thread. You have made others.

      if you retract your smears, clarify why you said Colorado Wellington’s statement was both an “assertion” and ridiculous, I will withdraw my charge and apologize. But I will not be bullied into it.

  256. philjourdan says:
    May 6, 2013 at 1:47 pm

    Phil,

    I stayed away for the same reasons you listed earlier but I remained puzzled by Richard’s inexplicable smear in his very first response to me.

    His reference to the April 28 “Lewandowsky” thread is the key. Take a look if you haven’t already.

    It’s off the deep end.

    • @Colorado Wellington – Yes, I remember that one. I stayed out of it then because I saw no purpose in the comment or taking the thread off topic. When he resurrected the attack here, I stepped in. Perhaps I should not have. But I did not want to see him make so many egregious mistakes as normally he is very accurate and meticulous about what he writes.

  257. Anyone notice the pictures of flaming lands in the background of the picture where she’s flaming a book in the foreground? Have we found the arsonists?

  258. If they don’t read them, how do they know burning is better than reading them? Scary.

  259. @philjourdan – so I guessed right when I saw no more comments from you after your early remark on the Lewandowsky thread. I was very grateful, though, when you stepped in here. My “online temperament” is quite different from my real emotional makeup. Fortunately it doesn’t happen every day that someone I think I know would do what Richard did but “moderate” is not how I would describe my reaction should it happen face to face.

    Thank you.

  260. Ahh, so “The Department of Meteorology and Climate Science” regrets the action and “the university” does not condone, but it was Prof. Bridger herself that posed in the picture.

    I wonder if she regrets and does not condone…

    Maybe it’s just that “mistakes were made”.

  261. I really think there should be some consequences for these professors. Well, something more than the everlasting shame that they have heaped upon themselves, the Department of Meteorology and Climate Science, and the university. I’m thinking a public debate between the two arson prone professors and Lord Monckton and Prof Lindzen would be in order. The question being “Resolved: It is better to burn a book than to entertain any competing notions about climate science.” And our would be arsonists must defend the resolution. That would be a fitting punishment.

  262. Let them burn books ! The more the better !! This only shows how desperate they are. Reasonable people recognize desperation.

  263. The San Jose incident was a silly attempt at satire and it doesn’t make the arguments of Watts or his ilk any more credible. And lost in the noise are more antics of the Heartland Institute which again is using its considerable financial resources to insert obfuscation into what is essentially a scientific argument that it doesn’t have the expertise to refute. Like many “think tanks”, Heartland runs a dubious game in which a position in which it is deeply invested politically is the starting point for generating pseudo-intellectual arguments that support that position while ignoring evidence or arguments to the contrary.

    REPLY: My and readers credibility isn’t the issue, since we aren’t the ones stupid enough to photgraph ourselves this way. Your point is moot.

    Why not ask them how many Greenpeace, WWF, and other NGO books favorable to “the cause” they have decided to keep there at SJSU? I’ll bet they have more than a couple available on faculty shelves and in the library. Like with the IPCC using those NGO’s for references in AR4, this tendency is nothing more than scientific tribalism. – Anthony

  264. Paul Avery attacks the victim and the messenger, and brushes off the offenders as only “silly” and the discussion of it as “noise”. Well, that’s “climate science”®

Comments are closed.