UPDATE: 4/3/15 1PM PST WUWT gets results, Tom is out of “twitmo”
I don’t regularly take up causes on WUWT, but this one sticks in my craw for the sheer pointlessness of it all. To borrow an overused phrase from the warmist movement, this is a “canary in the coal mine for free speech and climate skepticism”. Yesterday, I posted Abusive censorship on Twitter – same word used by Gavin Schmidt gets commenter banned.
In that post, you can see the exchange and what appears to be the reason, simply using the word “crap” to describe a graph. Nelson compared his use of the word to how Gavin Schmidt has used the word on Twitter in the past. In keeping with Team ‘no culpability” policy, Gavin complains there’s no comparison, and wants to be left out of the issue. Of course he does.
Of course, Gavin doesn’t seem to mind abusing Tom:
The story got picked up yesterday by Mark Steyn and then Twitchy, along with some other outlets, and I surmised that by this morning, Nelson’s account would be restored; I was wrong and sent this out.
OK, time 2 get busy. Tom Nelson @tan123 still unfairly suspended 4 using same word as @ClimateOfGavin. http://t.co/GvlNFHusn9 Tweet @support
— Watts Up With That (@wattsupwiththat) April 2, 2015
Followed by some support:
.@wattsupwiththat @tan123 Twitter @support should realise – partisan political censorship could quite quickly destroy their whole business.
— Foxgoose (@Foxgoose) April 2, 2015
Hey @twitter @support: one man's "denier" is another man's freedom fighter! Restore @tan123 immediately!@SteveSGoddard @JunkScience
— D (@dabon8rr) April 2, 2015
And this one, that I wholeheartedly agree with.
@wattsupwiththat @tan123 @ClimateOfGavin @Support To claim Tom's abusive is simply absurd. He's been professional all along.
— Pierre L. Gosselin (@NoTricksZone) April 2, 2015
I’ve been following Tom for years, he’s never abusive, always courteous, but he does ask some questions that make some in the climate establishment very uncomfortable.
Here are the rules that Twitter has in place, I can’t see where Tom Nelson went afoul of it.
The Twitter Rules
Our goal is to provide a service that allows you to discover and receive content from sources that interest you as well as to share your content with others. We respect the ownership of the content that users share and each user is responsible for the content he or she provides. Because of these principles, we do not actively monitor and will not censor user content, except in limited circumstances described below.
Content Boundaries and Use of Twitter
In order to provide the Twitter service and the ability to communicate and stay connected with others, there are some limitations on the type of content that can be published with Twitter. These limitations comply with legal requirements and make Twitter a better experience for all. We may need to change these rules from time to time and reserve the right to do so. Please check back here to see the latest.
- Impersonation: You may not impersonate others through the Twitter service in a manner that does or is intended to mislead, confuse, or deceive others.
- Trademark: We reserve the right to reclaim usernames on behalf of businesses or individuals that hold legal claim or trademark on those usernames. Accounts using business names and/or logos to mislead others may be permanently suspended.
- Private information: You may not publish or post other people’s private and confidential information, such as credit card numbers, street address or Social Security/National Identity numbers, without their express authorization and permission. You may not post intimate photos or videos that were taken or distributed without the subject’s consent.
- Violence and Threats: You may not publish or post direct, specific threats of violence against others.
- Copyright: We will respond to clear and complete notices of alleged copyright infringement. Our copyright procedures are set forth in the Terms of Service.
- Unlawful Use: You may not use our service for any unlawful purposes or in furtherance of illegal activities. International users agree to comply with all local laws regarding online conduct and acceptable content.
- Misuse of Twitter Badges: You may not use badges, such as but not limited to the Promoted or Verified Twitter badge, unless provided by Twitter. Accounts using these badges as part of profile photos, header photos, background images, or in a way that falsely implies affiliation with Twitter may be suspended.
Abuse and Spam
Twitter strives to protect its users from abuse and spam. User abuse and technical abuse are not tolerated on Twitter.com, and may result in permanent suspension. Any accounts engaging in the activities specified below may be subject to permanent suspension.
- Serial Accounts: You may not create multiple accounts for disruptive or abusive purposes, or with overlapping use cases. Mass account creation may result in suspension of all related accounts. Please note that any violation of the Twitter Rules is cause for permanent suspension of all accounts.
- Targeted Abuse: You may not engage in targeted abuse or harassment. Some of the factors that we take into account when determining what conduct is considered to be targeted abuse or harassment are:
- if you are sending messages to a user from multiple accounts;
- if the sole purpose of your account is to send abusive messages to others;
- if the reported behavior is one-sided or includes threats
- Username Squatting: You may not engage in username squatting. Accounts that are inactive for more than six months may also be removed without further notice. Some of the factors that we take into account when determining what conduct is considered to be username squatting are:
- the number of accounts created
- creating accounts for the purpose of preventing others from using those account names
- creating accounts for the purpose of selling those accounts
- using feeds of third-party content to update and maintain accounts under the names of those third parties
- Invitation spam: You may not use Twitter.com’s address book contact import to send repeat, mass invitations.
- Selling usernames: You may not buy or sell Twitter usernames.
- Malware/Phishing: You may not publish or link to malicious content intended to damage or disrupt another user’s browser or computer or to compromise a user’s privacy.
- Spam: You may not use the Twitter service for the purpose of spamming anyone. What constitutes “spamming” will evolve as we respond to new tricks and tactics by spammers. Some of the factors that we take into account when determining what conduct is considered to be spamming are:
- If you have followed and/or unfollowed large amounts of users in a short time period, particularly by automated means (aggressive following or follower churn);
- If you repeatedly follow and unfollow people, whether to build followers or to garner more attention for your profile;
- If your updates consist mainly of links, and not personal updates;
- If a large number of people are blocking you;
- If a large number of spam complaints have been filed against you;
- If you post duplicate content over multiple accounts or multiple duplicate updates on one account;
- If you post multiple unrelated updates to a topic using #, trending or popular topic, or promoted trend;
- If you send large numbers of duplicate @replies or mentions;
- If you send large numbers of unsolicited @replies or mentions;
- If you add a large number of unrelated users to lists;
- If you repeatedly create false or misleading content;
- Randomly or aggressively following, favoriting or Retweeting Tweets;
- If you repeatedly post other users’ account information as your own (bio, Tweets, url, etc.);
- If you post misleading links (e.g. affiliate links, links to malware/click jacking pages, etc.);
- Creating misleading accounts or account interactions;
- Selling or purchasing account interactions (such as selling or purchasing followers, Retweets, favorites, etc.);
- Using or promoting third-party services or apps that claim to get you more followers (such as follower trains, sites promising “more followers fast” or any other site that offers to automatically add followers to your account);
- Graphic Content: You may not use pornographic or excessively violent media in your profile image, header image, or background image.
Your account may be suspended for Terms of Service violations if any of the above is true. Please see our help pages on Following rules and best practices and Automation rules and best practices for a more detailed discussion of how the Rules apply to those particular account behaviors. Accounts created to replace suspended accounts will be permanently suspended.
Accounts engaging in any of these behaviors may be investigated for abuse. Accounts under investigation may be removed from Search for quality. Twitter reserves the right to immediately terminate your account without further notice in the event that, in its judgment, you violate these Rules or the Terms of Service.
We may revise these Rules from time to time; the most current version will always be at twitter.com/rules.
So, for those of you that think this suspension is unfair, help out by tweeting a message to @Twitter and @Support asking for @tan123 to be reinstated. if you want to show the double standard in action, you can reference today’s blog post with a short URL:
http://wp.me/p7y4l-w9w
or yesterday’s:
Be courteous. Thanks for your consideration. – Anthony
UPDATE: Gavin, in his full glory.
And his decision, after I replied “that’s not helpful, and reflects badly on you sir”
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.


Je suis Tom Nelson
I don’t think a ban on twitter deserves quite this level of indignation, you can’t really be comparing a case of an online fight to death, destruction, and murder commited by terrorists.
It was a joke.
Get over yourself SE.
david smith,
Naw, it’s a dogwhistle. Not quite as subtle, but so is this: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/04/01/abusive-censorship-on-twitter-same-word-used-by-gavin-schmidt-gets-commenter-banned/#comment-1895723
“Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.” ~H. L. Mencken … and I feel the same about climate “scientists”.
One doesn’t need to be a dog to hear it. However, I do keep a canary around this coalmine just in case.
Brandon,
Nah, it’s a joke.
However, I’m more than happy to say that some warmistas such as Mike Mann and Al Gore are scum-bags and charlatans.
Let your canary choke on that.
david smith,
Neither of us are Stephen Skinner, but I’m happy to express my opinion as fact for effect.
My canary has no material issue with what is written in primary literature — nay, textbooks of physics and atmospheric chemistry — about the relevant core principles of radiative forcing due to IR-active atmospheric species. It does look askance at some of the future projections because it is a smart bird and payed attention to all those lectures about the limitations of inference and uncertainty of many many sorts in college.
Just read Stephen’s reply.
it seems SE was correct. Mea culpa .
Brandon,
Your canary seems to have more discerning lungs than I have it credit for!
OK, On reflection Someone Else is correct, it was a cheap shot on my part.
So Gavin thinks it had nothing to do with the word “crap”.
Presumably he believes it is because of Tom’s sceptical views then.
From the rules defining spam: “If you repeatedly create false or misleading content;”
In the minds of a twitter admin, allowing skeptics a voice would be like allowing ghost hunters to tweet about their paranormal encounters.
Crap, I should have checked twitter before commenting. There is all kinds of paranormal content, all of which is, by default, false or misleading. Apparently, twitter bans content based on purely political motivation.
Only believers in ghost hunting and paranormal encounters are allowed. Denier.
“If you repeatedly create false or misleading content;”
But doesn’t that apply to most of what climastrologists spew??
Hey, Gavin may be an expert on “crap” so I wouldn’t challenge him on anything related to “crap”.
/grin
No one ought to be surprised by Gavin Schmidt’s behavior. The man is hardly a profile in courage.
Here is him running away from debate with Roy Spencer on John Stossel’s program:
Gavin Schmidt’s behaviour is so gobsmacking pathetic that it’s funny.
He acts like he’s afraid of catching the “koodies” from a “climate denier”.
Gavin is infamous for his censorship onRealClimate.
Gavin is deomonstrating the important differnce between educational achievement and wisdom. He is so strong in one category and so utterly lacking in the other.
Which one does he have? He may have initials behind his name but he has not demonstrated either.
I’m not on Twitter or FaceBook, and never will be, but I hope you tweeters will deluge Twitter in this case. Let the silent majority be heard.
FB is (Was for me) a common connection of people, across world, as in my case. I used to be able to “communicate” to any of my FB “friends” in the UK, New Zealand, America and Africa…etc etc etc. Now, I can’t.
I’ll just have to use Viber (Are you reading this FB?).
OK, in light of the Indiana Cake War headlines, a contrarian libertarian view:
I have a right to free speech, but I don’t have a right to a free public platform.
Do I have a “right” to a free Twitter account? Does anyone? It’s their servers, their dime, their turf. Why should they not be able to cut anyone off, for any reason? They may be biased leftist jerks, and probably are, but it’s their property, not ours.
Yep, they have the right to violate their own guidelines, and enforce unwritten rules unevenly, they sure do. And Twitter users who abject are free to vote with their feet, or, more likely, deluge them with support for Tom. If enough people object, Tom will be reinstated.
I don’t know, Twitter could be construed as a “public accomodation”, like a pizza shop.
The declaration is that a ‘place’ is a ‘public space’ and therefore open to anyone. It also means Twitter would not be able to serve alcohol without a licence. Interesting thought…
As Alan Watt notes, the biggest problem of all is the gross double standard: Pizzerias will lose because they are a “public accommodation”, and Twitter will win because they are a “private entity with prerogatives under the Bill of Rights”.
Heads I win, tails you lose.
Twitter better watch out, the pizzeria is doing just fine…
“A crowdfunding campaign has raised nearly $140,000 for the Indiana pizzeria forced to close its doors after vowing never to cater a same-sex wedding.”
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/memories-pizza-indiana-crowdfunding-campaign
Exactly. Look, I can understand that we’re all pissed about how Tom was treated. It was underhanded and obviously prejudicial. But I still think it was Twitter’s prerogative. Does it make them look mean and petty? Hell yes. But that’s their choice to make.
Larger principles are more important than specific incidents.
That last was for brians356.
So, Twitter is a corporation and is subject to anti-discrimination laws as are other licensed businesses (federal laws for sure, and likely laws whatever state in which they incorporated). How exactly is this different than the Indiana religious freedom law presently in the news? Liberals say the religious freedom law in Indiana is discriminatory. Publicly licensed businesses shouldn’t be able to turn someone away because of their beliefs. The law is reported to be flawed. As reports and protests go, a business that serves the public should not, except where clear conduct violations exist, be able to pick and choose to whom it grants service. Exactly how is this Twitter situation with Tom Nelson different? Isn’t this another measure of the double-standard we see constantly with liberals? Is this actually illegal, regardless of those (with whom I agree) who have stated that Twitter has a prerogative to deny service?
Note that I made no statement about my agreement or disagreement with the Indiana law garnering so much attention. I’m simply asking why is this Twitter refusal to serve someone, on an apparently arbitrary and capricious basis, different than what is being reported about the Indiana law that mostly liberals are protesting at present. Where am I wrong in drawing this comparison?
This Twitter thing is simply another example of relativistic morality on the part of liberals. I can break the rules but you can’t. Do as I say not as I do. Pathetic responses from G. Schmidt, in my opinion.
Tom Nelson, this is the sort of thing over which liberals sue in court (and often win large judgements). Cha-ching for you, my man!
Bruce
PS: for those not familiar (international visitors here?), the religious freedom law in Indiana stems from a catering business that opted not to cater a same-sex wedding on religious grounds and then got sued.
http://www.gofundme.com/MemoriesPizza
$417,335 Raised by 14,162 people in 1 day
And counting…
I don’t know if Twitter has been using the “safe harbor” provision of the law covering information service providers, but that provision only applies if they do not exercise editorial control. By not closing Gavin Schmidt’s account for the same violation of TOS, they come across to me as exercising editorial control. In that case they can be held liable for anything their users put up.
@ur momisugly Boulder Skeptic 7:33pm You couldn’t be more wrong. The Indiana law does NOT stem from a catering business – it’s a family owned small pizzaria that has NEVER catered weddings. There are 232, now 231, pizzarias in that town and the gays could have easily strolled to any other one and asked for catering services. And what ever happened to freedom of association? Would the gay couple sue anyone who declined to attend their mirage on grounds of discrimation? The pizza owners never said they wouldn’t serve gays, they just don’t want to be a part of something they believe is againsts God’s law. When a law forces that kind of association, the law itself is discrimatory.
@ur momisugly Boulder Skeptic 7:33pm You couldn’t be more wrong. The Indiana law does NOT stem from a catering business – it’s a family owned small pizzaria that has NEVER catered weddings. There are 232, now 231, pizzarias in that town and the gays could have easily strolled to any other one and asked for catering services. And what ever happened to freedom of association? Would the gay couple sue anyone who declined to attend their mirage? The pizza owners never said they wouldn’t serve gays, they just don’t want to be a part of something they believe is againsts God’s law. When a law forces that kind of association, the law itself is discrimatory. I am absolutely opposed to cultural Marxism.
icouldahad April 3, 2015 at 7:00 pm
You might try reading again. You said I couldn’t be more wrong and then proceeded to make the exact point I was describing.
The Indiana law is being protested by liberals and the LBGT community as some great atrocity that someone decided not to participate with others with whom they have disagreements based on religious principles. My question was, how is this banning of T Nelson on Twitter any different from what the pizza shop did (i.e. choosing not to associate with someone based on beliefs)? Where is the same indignation against a ban by Twitter because of their beliefs? My point was, if they were applying their indignation and “Principles” equally, they would be boycotting Twitter as well as the Indiana law. But they are not. Because T. Nelson isn’t in their circle. They are the same situation at the core. Why aren’t the liberals protesting BOTH. Because there is a double standard and a moral relativism at play.
We actually agree. I believe the pizza shop should not be forced to have a business relationship with anyone they choose not to. If they do that enough, they might go out of business and that’s what capitalism is all about. Let people vote with their dollars. Plenty of other pizza shops were available to provide the requested services. But to bring this back home, I have no problem with Twitter banning whomever they choose either and if they do that enough, they might go out of business. Marxism in any form is doomed to eventual failure and is inherently a trampling of individual liberty.
Eustace, I agree with you, but one could make the argument that Twitter is a “public accommodation” like a restaurant or bakery and, as such, should be prohibited from discriminating against customers with different beliefs.
I don’t agree with the “public accommodation” concept. It may be law, but I still don’t agree with it.
“I don’t agree with the “public accommodation” concept. It may be law, but I still don’t agree with it.”
I also don’t agree with the “public accommodation” laws, but as long as we have to put up with the damn things I think Twitter should be bound by the same rules as my local restaurant is. Being libertarian does not mean we have to toss out fairness.
Even though Twitter as a private entity can decide to ban any thought or commentator they wish, when they censor speech purely based on, “I don’t agree with that.”, they achieve nothing less than “Supreme Idiot” status.
Imagine a cell phone company deciding to sell contracts only to democrats, that is how stupid Twitters position is.
Seems another example of how liberals go apoplectic when their ideas are challenged and fall back to their most comfortable position as petty tyrants.
ALX,
By denying half of the potential market place a voice, they are practically inviting a competitor to make a product that makes them go the way of the big IBM monopoly in PCs. What’s more, since they are in the cabal that is cheer leading the FCC takeover of the internet, I await their screams when the other party has control of the FCC and they wind up penalized in some way for their partisan position. Of course the other side does not do that because they believe in the rule of law and that is what the twits at twitter are counting on.
“By denying half of the potential market place a voice, they are practically inviting a competitor to make a product that makes them go the way of the big IBM monopoly in PCs”
That is basically what I told then when I made my complaint. They already have competition, two new social media entities came online just this past March. The Blaze network probably has the capacity to make them sweat, should they want to.
I reminded them that pissing off half their customers makes profitability a challenge.
Owen,
No, they aren’t. Nobody cares about the competitors. Nobody will use them.
The only sort of competition that would have any chance at all would have to be as heavily funded as Amazon or such. And I don’t see anyone ponying up that sort of money to build an alternative.
To clarify that was in response to “they are practically inviting a competitor to make a product that makes them go the way of the big IBM monopoly in PCs.”
Eustace is right. Is WUWT a “public accomodation”? Should Anthony be forced to reinstate troll accounts? I’m not arguing Tom is a troll. As a Libertarian myself, I would caution against using the State as a hammer because at some point, you will find yourself as a nail.
@Owen in GA – Its funny that you think “skeptics” make up 50% of twitters potential user base. Can you provide any data to back up that assertion? what percentage of the general populace is a climate change skeptic?
Eustace, I don’t agree with it either, but so long as it is the law, it must be applied even handedly.
The whole problem is that the law is only applied against companies that offend leftists.
Someone else: According to every poll, skeptics are at least 50% of the population.
Someone else
April 2, 2015 at 2:24 pm
“@Owen in GA – Its funny that you think “skeptics” make up 50% of twitters…”
I agree with you someone else, real skeptics make up no more than a few percent. I’ve come to accept the 97% figure for crowdthought folks even though the methodology of arriving at it was not even grade school science fair quality. But considering that the 3% demonstrably have a monopoly on the population’s intellect as evidenced by all the grave concern about skeptics overturning the CAGW theory and policy by even those at the highest level (the president for example), the army of lab-coated clones, 97 percent of the news media, 100 percent of the universities and scientific agencies and 99% of the funding, yes I get your point. We must be superhuman. Your talking points dealer makes no bones about the fact that skeptics are dangerous guys to argue with and deal with and that the might of the 97% of people and resources have to be brought to bear on these devilishly clever heretics who seem to be winning the battle.
I’ve mentioned the analogy before, Mrs someone else, we skeptics are like conservation biologists trying to save the unwittingly endangered Nile crocodiles, while the crocodiles are trying to bite our heads off. We’ll keep you safe though, we have been doing it for centuries.
And nobody is saying they don’t have a right to ban anyone they want.
The whole issue, as you are well aware is the double standards they are using when choosing when to apply their standards.
As a master of double standards, it’s hardly surprising that you would miss this.
@Eustace
I agree with you. The folks at twitter can be as unfair, biased, and hypocritical as they please. It’s their house.
And what of the networks needed to access their servers? Does Twitter own those as well? With the internet to begin being regulated, do the network owners have a new responsibility at enforcing rules onto Twitter, ensuring “equality” over publicly owned accesses?
Hey Eustace Cranch! “Do I have a “right” to a free Twitter account? ”
Certainly no natural right to an account — but remember that a Twitter account is not free. No money changes hands, but (and I am not a Tweeter, so someone correct me is I am wrong about this) you give them legal use of your information and words, which they then sell to marketers. Once you have an account there is a quid quo pro. Twitter’s responsibility is the same to you as any other merchant at that point. Let the lawyers begin the argument… 🙂
I recently re- read George Orwell’s novel 1984. I was absolutely flabbergasted at how much our current political situation mirrors the plots of the book. Historical revisionism, newspeak, and big brother…all coming to life before our very eyes by those who only want their version of “truth” to be told. Very scary, indeed.
I write op-ed pieces for local paper and I reference Orwell’s 1984 often.
Sadly, few get it – what do they read in school anymore?
Not about the Ministries of Truth and Plenty.
They read The Communist Manifesto. Often … and at length.
When you live a life based on censorship and lies, you assume everyone else does too so you come to believe that is just the way life is.
” exSSNcrew
April 2, 2015 at 12:15 pm
They read The Communist Manifesto. Often … and at length.”
No, they don’t. The real problem is that most high schools don’t encourage reading beyond very basic texts. They tend to ignore classical literature and poetry almost completely. That goes for charter schools as well. This in turn creates a growing generational gap in understanding and very limited communication potential. When my daughter was in high school, I did my best to encourage her to read widely both in genre and in time. Since her interests were and still are linguistics and languages, I tried to explain that she really needed a better than average grasp of the workings of her own language (beyond grammar through common metaphor and the devices which were known among Norse poets as “kennings”). She still comes to me with phrases “translated” to English from – say – Russian, which I help her convert into meaningful English that still carries the sense of the original language and meaning. She has come to realize that ol’ Dad had more of a point than she had understood at the time.
Duster
April 2, 2015 at 1:24 pm
“” exSSNcrew
April 2, 2015 at 12:15 pm
They read The Communist Manifesto. Often … and at length.”
No, they don’t. The real problem is that most high schools don’t encourage reading beyond very basic texts. ”
The Communist Manifesto is just a list of ten demands (of which 8 or so are implemented everywhere in the West; about 9 in the USA (the Exit Tax)).
So it should be comprehensible enough.
What you SHOULDN’T try to read is Das Kapital. It’s longer and boringer than Mein Kampf.
I had to read “1984” in high school, 50 years ago. and saw the fictions becoming realities. At the time the plot seemed totally unbelievable, today it’s unavoidable.
There are two “books”. 1984 and Animal Farm. Both, as I understand are the same principally, two extremes, but opposite. One “left”, one “right”. Both “systems”, equally failing the people it was to support. We can draw on a real example of the “leftist 1984” model. That is Ethiopia. It failed on a monumental scale! Thats why Marxism/Socialsm do not factor in Ethiopian life…they are too busy trying to make enough food/money to feed themselves!
I prefer to think that the political world is not flat, but that it is, instead, round. Hence, no matter which direction you go in, left, right, up or down, if you go far enough, you end up in the same place: The Dark Side.
Phil, that metaphor doesn’t hold water; the earth rotates and shines on all sides. So no matter where you are, it just depends on where the light is shining at the time? There are certain things that are never right…
Please allow me some poetic license. I was making a play on words (re: Star Wars), when I said “The Dark Side.” As you say, some things are never right. We are in complete agreement on that.
Patrick
April 2, 2015 at 12:12 pm
“There are two “books”. 1984 and Animal Farm. Both, as I understand are the same principally, two extremes, but opposite. One “left”, one “right”. ”
Quite wrong. Both are about socialism. Orwell was a socialist. He was talking about what he knew.
Mussolini started his career as a socialist. Hitler called the worst enemy of the NSDAP the bourgeousie and the aristocrats.
It was Stalin – not a very objective figure – who declared Hitler to be “extreme right”.
The “third way socialist” Henry Ford was financier of Hitler’s election campaign.
DirkH April 2, 2015 at 4:21 pm
….1984 and Animal Farm. … Both are about socialism.
Someone else April 2, 2015 at 2:31 pm
Your mistake is just comparing it to “leftist control methods”. The same applies when extremism is applied to any ideology.
Your political biases are showing, DirkH.
SE gets this one correct.
I disagree. Dirk is, in my view, exactly correct. The real argument is, was, and always will be about statist, government control, vs. individual liberty. Socialism leads to ever greater central control. The US idea of individual rights, (within the context of the rule of law and those rights not impinging on others same liberties, stealing as an example) superseding all “group” power, in whatever form is central to issue.
Modern education teaches very little about the founding principles of the US.
“DirkH
April 2, 2015 at 4:21 pm
The “third way socialist” Henry Ford was financier of Hitler’s election campaign.”
In this respect you are correct. Ford, “donated” (Tax avoidance?), profits from Ford vehicle sales in Germany to Hitler. Ford also copied and made the “Willys Jeep”. He also treated his non-english speaking workers like “slaves”, he was a horrid man IMO. I will never but a Ford product! I will also never buy a VW product.
1984 and Animal Farm, IMO, were more about how extreme “politically motivated systems” (The control of people because religion isn’t working these days) can go, left or right, does not matter. Orwell saw this. Jew, Christian and Muslim. All in “conflict”. Stalin, Mao and Hitler “realised” it and saw a “solution”!
Hey David A, “The real argument is, was, and always will be about statist, government control, vs. individual liberty.”
Bingo! Yes, in the end it comes down to authoritarianism vs individualism — or maybe a better pharsing is “coercion vs liberty”.
The reason why politics today is presented as left vs right is because both wings always move quickly toward tyranny. Let the people choose what logo their politicians wear and who cares what they actually do once in power? After all, we are a free people! We get to choose whether we are whipped for not picking enough cotton, or whipped because we have not hoed enough rows.
Pardon the outburst of cynicism. Long term I am optimistic about liberty.
1984 was intended to be a cautionary tale, unfortunately some people think it was a blueprint.
It is actually frightening watching this. Those who are “in control” don’t see anything wrong with what they are doing, because they honestly believe that their opinions are 100% correct. That is no different from the current wave of islamic terror… their ideology makes it impossible to even consider that anyone else could possibly have any useful contribution.
Yes, I’m equating leftist control methods with terrorism. One marginalizes and removes the voice of alternate views, the other kills. Same result, overall.
Incidentally, and not like I think anyone cares, but I predicted this 20 years ago when I first saw forum operators censoring certain people for their politics. With a new communication medium comes new people to exploit it, every time.
Your mistake is just comparing it to “leftist control methods”. The same applies when extremism is applied to any ideology.
True. Problem is, “everyone” thinks their views are “moderate” and that everyone else is “biased”.
“With a new communication medium comes new people to exploit it, every time.”
And new and better methods for propagandizing, “othering”, spreading FUD, silencing heretics (such as organized downvoting), hectoring, misdirection, data tampering, dis- and misinformation…
The correlation is more apt than you may realize. Look what happens whenever leftists gain total control, anywhere in the world. The first thing they do is to start executing those who oppose them, or even just disagree with them.
The key distinction is whether censorship comes in the form of the power of government. For example, Anthony is free to banish anyone from his home here at WUWT he wishes. Same for the Alarmists website with skeptics comments. But if the government though tells Google-WordPress to shut down WUWT because it carries amessage it disfavors, then it is time for the 2nd American Revolution.
Who is this Schmidt guy – talking like some mardy teenager that’s not getting its own way?
The sake of all of us I do hope its THE director of NASA GISS.
Oh wait! Obama has just “cured” the Iran nuclear issue! I have to go find my play-tex 24hr girdle…I used to wear that in anticipation of a good laugh. But now I need to put it on well in advance because the joks come really really late these days!
What is the US (7th fleet?) doing no the red sea off Yemen? I’d say making sure oil still passes. One has to ask why does Saudi strike Yemen?
Just feel the need to point out that Saudia owns Yeman.
The US owns Saudi too…and there is a heavy US Navy presence in the Red Sea. It’s been building for some years now.
One nuclear device on one old freighter in the middle of one fleet. Obama is a genius.
One Nuke detonated above the USA could cause an EMP that would do more damage. Does that still make him a genius?
It’s happening right now. “Pirates” are impacting oil shipments through the straights of Aman. Does not get shown on MSM media too much these days, but it;s there. I “understand” that there is a building of a military “presense” on the east coast of Africa right around the gulf of Oman.
Sorry, my geography failed me. The Gulf of Aden.
Worth pointing out, I feel, that Gavin Schmidt is not the only prominent warmist mentioned in Tom’s “offending” tweet. Maybe you’re barking up the wrong tree by going after Gavin?
Just saying……..
Ha! Ha! I see @ClimateofGavin just blocked you. Please disregard above comment.
It won’t be long before the Climate Change Fascists come for internet blogs too.
Sorry, but this much like the Vietnam War: nothing to win, and no way to win it.
Seriously, we know that warmists are thin-skinned. Why continue belabouring the point?
Vietnam was winnable, and indeed had been effectively “won”, until Vietnam was given away by democrats.
Not “effectively won” it was won. It was also worth winning because it stopped the spread of communism through Asia, giving democracies such as Japan time to mature.
Since the Vietnamese trade deficit is around 19 billion/yr in their favor, I’d say that they won.
So what. We (the politicians) never intended to win it.
You should all close your Twitter accounts en mass. It’s childish nonsense, anyway, in my opinion. I don’t have a Facebook account either, for the same reason. I understand some people like to inform others what they’re up to, but I would rather keep personal stuff exactly that. I will NEVER understand the huge appeal of these net institutions.
Or you could have your own private server so you can delete it all when you need to.
Yeah, just set up a private IRC server somewhere and go there. Only give out its address to those you like, and if someone stumbles across it, move again. Go underground (and stay there)
I use fb, but it’s a communication tool for keeping in touch. I won’t ever understand these people that have 1500 “friends”, that’s going way, far overboard. I have about 50, and from time to time lose one or two and gain a new one.
I do not, and never have, twitted.
People who tweet are twits.
No I disagree strongly. Todays new geblneration communi ates via social media. If Skeptics closed their twitter accounts, it would be a tiny fraction of the twitterverse the ecofascists use to communicate their lies. Campaign Obama used it to great effect to spread lies and message versus Romney in 2012. Closing your twitter is selfcensorship the left would love.
No just the opposite. Twitter loudly the skeptic message, en masse and do it politely with science and data. Put your challenges to the alarmists Priesthood in the form of questions they would rather not answer:
Examples:
– what about the 18 yr long T pause?
– why is Antarctic sea ice maintaining +2 sd levels above 30 year average for more than 2 years now.
– why are the glaciers in the Karakorams growing?
– why are there fewer severe storm intensity frequency for the past 10 years compared the the previous 20 years?
– – why are world wide crop yields steadily increasing year on year for 30 yrs?
Just keep hitting them with inconvenient data that shows the Alarmists’ message is bogus.
And don’t self-censor your right to ask questions.
today’s new generation communicates…
All of your questions have the same answer….climateweirdingwarmingchange
Can anybody cite a period when climate DIDN’T change?
The overall trend since the end of the last glaciation may be warming, but no matter which data you look at the variations in average temperature are generally quite significant.
Heck, the variation in temperature over the six month winter-summer minima-maxima is probably 50 degrees,
Humans, who have adapted to virtually every place on the planet (agreed some more readily than others) will not be able to cope with even the worst predictions of the warmists?
To quote a television character, “Horse hockey”.
But before you close your Twitter accounts en masse, why not start a mass campaign to get the Schmidt dude banned from it for using the three-letter “C” word? Or for any other creative reason you can come up with? That he doesn’t want to be involved is an excellent reason for involving him.
Retreating from the social spheres is no different to admitting defeat.
Naive question from a non-twittering person: How can I help influencing the Twitter administrators without becoming a twitterer?
My name was misspelt above (by me) – it is a bit less strange than the misspelling indicates.
Nice one. You typoed an extra k in the middle, and your brain said there needs to be an l as it comes after the k.
A similarish error in ‘express’ renders it exprperss. And yes, it has been done.
http://www.google.fi/#q=%22exprperss%22
see gator69 comment immediately below.
They have changed the complaint form since Tony’s suspension, but after some digging I was able to find good contact info for those who do not have an account.
http://www.contacthelp.com/Twitter/customer-service
Phone: 415-222-9670
press@twitter.com,
http://www.contacthelp.com/Twitter/update-department/421
Flood those fascists with your righteous indignation.
a few years ago I had quite a lengthy correspondence with a bot called Lynda on yahoo groups support
Just pray that censorship on a free public internet forum is ALL they try to do.
I was hoping, given the date, that this was an “Onion” style joke. But I don’t think it is.
I await their use of coercive force against Putin’s Russia. I’m sure that they’ll have the same degree of success that Greenpeace did.
You for got China and India.
Has anyone seen Schmidt and Mann in the same place at the same time? They might be the same person. Or is being bald, beady-eyed, pudgy, with a lame devil-beard a prerequisite for being a GW evangelist?
To quote Carla from the Cheers tv show:
“Ooooh, a completely unprovoked personal attack… I like it!”
sarc/
Yes, you need to grow a prison pussy and have MPB
As I posted earlier today in a completely unrelated thread somewhere else, one must simply accept that Big Tech is firmly in the hands of the Social Justice Warriors and other left-leaning individuals, the same folks who are the major proponents of CAGW. The only question is how long it will take Google, Apple, Twitter et al. to “disappear” any non-like-minded websites, users, etc.
One of the reasons that “Big Tech” is firmly in the hands of the Social Justice Warriors is that “Big Tech” has to please the State. The central government loves “global warming” and other social “justice” issues since they always seem to require the state to gain ever more power over the populace. Amazing how that works.
Saying what you think is right is not a cause.
Here is what I sent:
https://twitter.com/PremDetAnalysis/status/583711226145837058
John
I sent the same. Copied yours for easy use.
markstoval on April 2, 2015 at 1:37 pm
– – – – – – – –
markstoval,
No problem.
John
I don’t much use or like Twitter. It breeds nastiness.
A tool is what you make of it. Murderers have used axes and chainsaws, but people put them to good use every day.
Interesting that you allude to axes and chainsaws instead of the usual tool of murderers.
Would you be prepared to declare that possession of any and all firearms should be permitted, and only criminal use of such a tool should be condemned?
My guess is that you, in particular, do not subscribe to that view.
Your analogy is not apt in any event, which is usually the case for analogies when they are used to make broad, general statements about specific subjects.
Twitter is twitter; it’s not a hammer or a chisel or a spade or a cement mixer, so suggesting that it would make concrete just fine if people used it appropriately is silly. Twitter is the sum of its tweets, and if the tweets weren’t so twit-like, it wouldn’t be twitter.
I agree. I first found it when the Samliili pirates took The MaerAlabama. I was fun then, because no one supported the pirates, it showed cleverness to make fun of them in very few words. But it quickly became pointles
Darn I did not mean to post that in such mess. Sorry.
I was briefly enthusiastic about twitter when isis were closing in on Kobane.
Initially, it seemed like there were eye-witness accounts that were much more informed than the news reports.
It didn’t take long to realize that wasn’t the case; almost all of the tweets were regurgitated press releases from interested parties or news items from non-msm news sources.
Thousands of re-tweets and a format that is 50% metadata.
As so many have observed, twitter is a colony for twits.
Dr. Spencer – thanks for everything you’ve done in the pursuit of truth. Your book began an fascinating journey for me.
I hope you don’t mind my twitter links to your work/thoughts on model falsification and adjustments, presented as innocuously as possible given the diversion of hundreds of billions from US families.
The silence is deafening from scientists on the train as the scientific method, statistics, peer-review, FOIA and those struggling to meet food and energy needs have been thrown under the bus.
JRP
Twitter is utterly stupid precisely because it devolves into name-calling and snark. It’s a pointless, useless waste of time and electrons. Abandon it to the bully echo-chambers.
Lies, damned lies, and climate “science” – what’s new!
As we say in the UK: What a wanker.
double standard….
Violence and Threats: You may not publish or post direct, specific threats of violence against others.
https://twitter.com/back_ttys/status/583653317903024133/photo/1
He who is true in little is true in much; He who is false in small things is false in great.