Note: There’s a response and analysis to this post here.
NOTE: Predictably, Joe Romm has turned this post into a personal bashing of me over at his Climate Progress blog. For some eye opening viewpoints from his side of the argument, have a look at the 495 comments on his parent blog “Think Progress” here. UPDATE: many of those ugly and violent comments at TP have been “sanitized” since I drew embarrassing attention to them. The word “filthy” in my post below, is pointing to the multiple use of the word to describe humans in the manifesto of the gunman, also published below. I realize that may upset some people, and for that I apologize. However, it is instructive to read the manifesto to see how global warming hype drove this man to do what he did. From this MSNBC story:
Lee said he experienced an ‘‘awakening” when he watched former Vice President Al Gore’s environmental documentary ‘‘An Inconvenient Truth.”
UPDATE: It’s over, from MSNBC:
Police shot a gunman who held three hostages for several hours Wednesday at the Discovery Communications building in Silver Spring, Md., authorities said. They said the hostages were safe and the gunman was in custody. Police said the gunman’s condition was unknown. At least one explosive device went off when he was shot, and other explosive devices could still be in the building in Montgomery County in suburban Washington, D.C., they said.
UPDATE2: MSNBC is now reporting the gunman has been killed.
=======================================
Well, you filthy readers, see what happens when we don’t acquiesce? In case you haven’t heard by now, a gunman named James Lee, an Asian man with a years-long vendetta against the Discovery Channel cable network has entered the building and got an armed hostage taking situation going on right now.
Some news coverage here:
Armed Man Believed to Be Environmental Protester Takes Hostages in Discovery Channel Building
Among his demands from the manifesto on his website:
Find solutions so that people stop breeding as well as stopping using Oil in order to REVERSE Global warming and the destruction of the planet!
MSNBC reports:
Lee said he experienced an ‘‘awakening” when he watched former Vice President Al Gore’s environmental documentary ‘‘An Inconvenient Truth.”
Perhaps inspired by Gore, and Dr. James Hansen’s recent call for civil disobedience, we have today’s environmental public relations train wreck turned armed hostage situation.
THE MANIFESTO OF JAMES LEE:
(downloaded before traffic took it down):PDF here at TMZ
The Discovery Channel MUST broadcast to the world their commitment to save the planet and to do the following IMMEDIATELY:
1. The Discovery Channel and it’s affiliate channels MUST have daily television programs at prime time slots based on Daniel Quinn’s “My Ishmael” pages 207-212 where solutions to save the planet would be done in the same way as the Industrial Revolution was done, by people building on each other’s inventive ideas. Focus must be given on how people can live WITHOUT giving birth to more filthy human children since those new additions continue pollution and are pollution. A game show format contest would be in order. Perhaps also forums of leading scientists who understand and agree with the Malthus-Darwin science and the problem of human overpopulation. Do both. Do all until something WORKS and the natural world starts improving and human civilization building STOPS and is reversed! MAKE IT INTERESTING SO PEOPLE WATCH AND APPLY SOLUTIONS!!!!
2. All programs on Discovery Health-TLC must stop encouraging the birth of any more parasitic human infants and the false heroics behind those actions. In those programs’ places, programs encouraging human sterilization and infertility must be pushed. All former pro-birth programs must now push in the direction of stopping human birth, not encouraging it.
3. All programs promoting War and the technology behind those must cease. There is no sense in advertising weapons of mass-destruction anymore. Instead, talk about ways to disassemble civilization and concentrate the message in finding SOLUTIONS to solving global military mechanized conflict. Again, solutions solutions instead of just repeating the same old wars with newer weapons. Also, keep out the fraudulent peace movements. They are liars and fakes and had no real intention of ending the wars. ALL OF THEM ARE FAKE! On one hand, they claim they want the wars to end, on the other, they are demanding the human population increase. World War II had 2 Billion humans and after that war, the people decided that tripling the population would assure peace. WTF??? STUPIDITY! MORE HUMANS EQUALS MORE WAR!
4. Civilization must be exposed for the filth it is. That, and all its disgusting religious-cultural roots and greed. Broadcast this message until the pollution in the planet is reversed and the human population goes down! This is your obligation. If you think it isn’t, then get hell off the planet! Breathe Oil! It is the moral obligation of everyone living otherwise what good are they??
5. Immigration: Programs must be developed to find solutions to stopping ALL immigration pollution and the anchor baby filth that follows that. Find solutions to stopping it. Call for people in the world to develop solutions to stop it completely and permanently. Find solutions FOR these countries so they stop sending their breeding populations to the US and the world to seek jobs and therefore breed more unwanted pollution babies. FIND SOLUTIONS FOR THEM TO STOP THEIR HUMAN GROWTH AND THE EXPORTATION OF THAT DISGUSTING FILTH! (The first world is feeding the population growth of the Third World and those human families are going to where the food is! They must stop procreating new humans looking for nonexistant jobs!)
6. Find solutions for Global Warming, Automotive pollution, International Trade, factory pollution, and the whole blasted human economy. Find ways so that people don’t build more housing pollution which destroys the environment to make way for more human filth! Find solutions so that people stop breeding as well as stopping using Oil in order to REVERSE Global warming and the destruction of the planet!
7. Develop shows that mention the Malthusian sciences about how food production leads to the overpopulation of the Human race. Talk about Evolution. Talk about Malthus and Darwin until it sinks into the stupid people’s brains until they get it!!
8. Saving the Planet means saving what’s left of the non-human Wildlife by decreasing the Human population. That means stopping the human race from breeding any more disgusting human babies! You’re the media, you can reach enough people. It’s your resposibility because you reach so many minds!!!
9. Develop shows that will correct and dismantle the dangerous US world economy. Find solutions for their disasterous Ponzi-Casino economy before they take the world to another nuclear war.
10. Stop all shows glorifying human birthing on all your channels and on TLC. Stop Future Weapons shows or replace the dialogue condemning the people behind these developments so that the shows become exposes rather than advertisements of Arms sales and development!
11. You’re also going to find solutions for unemployment and housing. All these unemployed people makes me think the US is headed toward more war.
Humans are the most destructive, filthy, pollutive creatures around and are wrecking what’s left of the planet with their false morals and breeding culture.
For every human born, ACRES of wildlife forests must be turned into farmland in order to feed that new addition over the course of 60 to 100 YEARS of that new human’s lifespan! THIS IS AT THE EXPENSE OF THE FOREST CREATURES!!!! All human procreation and farming must cease!
It is the responsiblity of everyone to preserve the planet they live on by not breeding any more children who will continue their filthy practices. Children represent FUTURE catastrophic pollution whereas their parents are current pollution. NO MORE BABIES! Population growth is a real crisis. Even one child born in the US will use 30 to a thousand times more resources than a Third World child. It’s like a couple are having 30 babies even though it’s just one! If the US goes in this direction maybe other countries will too!
Also, war must be halted. Not because it’s morally wrong, but because of the catastrophic environmental damage modern weapons cause to other creatures. FIND SOLUTIONS JUST LIKE THE BOOK SAYS! Humans are supposed to be inventive. INVENT, DAMN YOU!!
The world needs TV shows that DEVELOP solutions to the problems that humans are causing, not stupify the people into destroying the world. Not encouraging them to breed more environmentally harmful humans.
Saving the environment and the remaning species diversity of the planet is now your mindset. Nothing is more important than saving them. The Lions, Tigers, Giraffes, Elephants, Froggies, Turtles, Apes, Raccoons, Beetles, Ants, Sharks, Bears, and, of course, the Squirrels.
The humans? The planet does not need humans.
You MUST KNOW the human population is behind all the pollution and problems in the world, and YET you encourage the exact opposite instead of discouraging human growth and procreation. Surely you MUST ALREADY KNOW this!
I want Discovery Communications to broadcast on their channels to the world their new program lineup and I want proof they are doing so. I want the new shows started by asking the public for inventive solution ideas to save the planet and the remaining wildlife on it.
These are the demands and sayings of Lee.
==============================
h/t to the Seattle Weekly blogs and WUWT DocattheAutopsy
Sponsored IT training links:
We provide up to date 350-030 questions and 70-649 answers for practice so you will pass 220-701 certification exam easily and fast.
Chris Winter says:
September 2, 2010 at 12:58 pm
“So then, you believe CO2 emissions have nothing to do with climate change? I think that’s incorrect.”
Sigh, this is why there is such a disconnect. The climate will change and always has changed with or without man-emitted CO2.
Yo, Duckster: Quack, quack, quack!
James Sexton… There is an important difference that I think you are missing. The Right to Life people we openly calling for the murder of people like Dr Tiller. No one discussing AGW is telling people to go out and commit murder. Most people I read are saying that this is a very concerning issue and we need to seriously look at market based solutions to avert a very unknown future if we continue on a “burn it all” trajectory.
just a thought, if there is such a thing as a Euthansia Society would it be increasingly risky to attend meetings if you were a past president ?
Rob Honeycutt says:
September 2, 2010 at 2:07 pm
“There is an important difference that I think you are missing. The Right to Life people we openly calling for the murder of people like Dr Tiller.”
I’d have to call bs on that one. You have proof of that? I know several right-to-lifers. None I know of have a violent bone in their bodies and we horrified at the murder of Dr. Tiller. So, you’re going to have to show me some proof on that. Or is that some propaganda you’re believing.
[REPLY – This is getting a little too far astray. Wrap it up. ~ Evan]
James… There is a full wiki page on anti-abortion violence including a long string of murders, attempted murder, and bombings. I would not lay this at the feet of every Right-to-Lifer but I do believe this is where the language we use matters.
Climate scientists, even climate activist, are not using the kind of rhetoric that suggests to anyone that they do anything other than understand the issue and look for viable solutions.
Gail Combs says:
September 2, 2010 at 5:15 am
We are on the same page.
James Sexton says:
September 2, 2010 at 8:33 am
Do you have a link – I couldn’t find the quote.
Thanks.
[snip OTT]
James Sexton wrote: “Sigh, this is why there is such a disconnect. The climate will change and always has changed with or without man-emitted CO2.”
Certainly it has, and will. And if we determine that it’s changing in harmful ways, we will at some point try to defend ourselves against that — just as we do with hurricanes, for example.
On the subject of whether or not CO2 is involved, the evidence I see tells me it is. Those who think there’s another reason for the steadily rising temperatures have yet to show me any convincing evidence.
CodeTech wrote: “Yes, we know you do. Isn’t that the basis of the whole disagreement? “WE” think CO2 is plant food and beneficial in almost every way. “YOU” think CO2 is the doom and end of the planet. See the difference?
This thread has actually been great… for identifying the next cadre of comment spammers/polluters…”
Yes, I see the difference between us. YOU think everyone who disagrees with you in any fashion is a misguided fearmonger who must be ridiculed. I think you misunderstand some science.
Rob Honeycutt says:
September 2, 2010 at 8:47 am
Anthony, I really don’t understand why you are choosing to trumpet James Lee as some kind of example of the left. This has far more to do with the mental stability of one individual than any given issue…..
_______________________________________________
I think the reason for this post is explained fully by James Sexton comment:
I think this serves to illustrate many of the points attempting to be made here. I find this absolutely astonishing, ——-from another site,
“ellielight
“When the earth is under attack, it takes a brave, principled hero to stand up for what is right. James Jay Lee was such a person. His desparation can be traced directly back to George Bush’s violent siege against the environment. I just wish Mr. Lee would have been more patient because Obama and the Democrats are completely on his side and were in the process of fulfilling his mandate. After the elctions, the Democrats WILL pass a set of environmental regulations that will begin reversing the damage cause by the Republicans and right wing money grabbers / planet rapers.””
“Some of the warmistas will see this man as a hero and a martyr. That is the point”
Joel wrote: “It isn’t wealth REdistribution if the original owner of the wealth keeps it, or passes it on to those he names. Since you do see it as REdistribution of wealth to the wealthy, I take it that you believe that the Government actually owns all money and everything, and that by letting the rich keep it then the government is giving them money at the expense of the poor.
This is a very wrong headed way to think about taxes and government.”
As long as there is any sort of government, taxes will be assessed to pay for it. Since rich and poor alike depend on certain government services, wealth redistribution by means of taxation will always be going on.
The only question, therefore, is what sort of tax structure is fairest. But this whole discussion is OT, so we will probably have to agree to disagree.
Chris Winter:
On the subject of whether or not CO2 is involved, the evidence I see tells me it is. Those who think there’s another reason for the steadily rising temperatures have yet to show me any convincing evidence
—————————
Puleeze. All the evidence… what, pray tell, is that unassailable, verifiable, peer reviewed and scientifically verified (i.e. no computer modeled scenarios) have you seen?
Chris Winter says:
“On the subject of whether or not CO2 is involved, the evidence I see tells me it is.”
Please cite your evidence.
Next, you say:
“Those who think there’s another reason for the steadily rising temperatures have yet to show me any convincing evidence.”
You’re new here, Chris, so let me explain. Those proposing a hypothesis, such as: an increase in human-emitted CO2 will cause catastrophic anthropogenic global warming [CO2=CAGW], have the burden of showing that their hypothesis explains reality better than the long-accepted null hypothesis, which says that the climate has always fluctuated in the past the way it is fluctuating now; nothing unusual is occurring.
Scientific skeptics [the only honest kind of scientists] need prove nothing. The burden is entirely on those proposing their new hypothesis.
The job of skeptics is to falsify proposed hypotheses. First, what are the real world observations? As you can see, the planet is emerging from the LIA. Nothing unusual is happening. And CO2 has such a negligible effect that it can be completely disregarded for all practical purposes; the UN/IPCC is wrong.
Now that you’ve had a primer on the Scientific Method, do you accept it? Or will you fall back on an emotional reaction, rejecting the Scientific Method to satisfy your belief in the bizarre notion that an atmosphere with a composition of non-CO2 gases of 99.97% is good — but one with 99.94% of non-CO2 gases will lead to runaway global warming and climate catastrophe? Keep in mind that there is no empirical [real world], testable evidence supporting that conjecture. None.
Now that you understand that the “convincing evidence” must be provided to skeptics by the purveyors of the CO2=CAGW hypothesis… where is the evidence?
Take your time.
Gail Combs… Anyone who holds James Lee up as a positive example is misguided in the extreme.
But I stand by my previous statements that climate scientists do not use rhetoric that promotes or in any way incites anyone to this kind of action.
From: Chris Winter on September 2, 2010 at 5:31 pm
What steadily rising temperatures?
You must have missed the BBC Q&A with the esteemed Professor Phil Jones of University of East Anglia’s Climactic Research Unit (CRU), back at February 13, 2010. He agreed there’s been no statistically-significant warming from 1995 to the present. From January 2002 to the present there is a negative trend (indicating global cooling) but it’s not statistically significant.
There are also distinct periods of warming. 1860 to 1880, 1910 to 1940, and 1975 to 1998 all have similar rates of warming that are not statistically different from each other, and you can toss 1975 to 2009 in that group as well.
The global temperatures are not steadily rising.
Chris Winter says:
September 2, 2010 at 5:31 pm
James Sexton wrote: “Sigh, this is why there is such a disconnect. The climate will change and always has changed with or without man-emitted CO2.”
Certainly it has, and will. And if we determine that it’s changing in harmful ways, we will at some point try to defend ourselves against that — just as we do with hurricanes, for example.
On the subject of whether or not CO2 is involved, the evidence I see tells me it is. Those who think there’s another reason for the steadily rising temperatures have yet to show me any convincing evidence.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The climate changes. Apparently we can agree on that. If at some point, the climate works in our favor, we do nothing, but if it doesn’t, we should do something? Uhmm, but it always changes. Do you actually believe we can stop the climate from changing? As far as the CO2 goes, there hasn’t been a shred of evidence that it is effecting any change at all. If you can show me it is, please do. Better, please show me how man emitted CO2 effects the climate. More, please show me how it adversely effects the climate.
Sis, history is replete with examples of how mankind thrives better in a warmer climate. Even if the minuscule amount of extra CO2 we put in the atmosphere causes the earth to be warmer, it would be a good thing.
Dr A Burns says:
September 1, 2010 at 1:50 pm
I wonder why he rates “Squirrels” above kangaroos and koalas … the latter didn’t even make it to his list.
Yeah, and how come ‘froggies’ get an exemption. What did Lee like about the cheese eating surrender monkeys?
@chris Winter (September 2, 2010 at 8:42 am)
“The bullets come from the left. — Quote that to the family of Dr. George Tiller and see what response you get.”
Well you’re right. Thats’ the one exception that I know.
Let me rephrase that: The bullets come from the people who do not believe in the freedom of men to make their own choices and live according to them, and who therefore prefer to impose their own ‘universal truths’ on others, i.e.
1. the radical left
2. religious fanatics
Ref – Leo Norekens says:
September 3, 2010 at 3:28 am
@chris Winter (September 2, 2010 at 8:42 am)
Bullets come from everywhere.
Some of the replies to me above make valid points. But now Anthony has posted a couple more articles about the incident, falling into the familiar trap of shrill accusations of extremism which characterize American politics. This site’s readers you would expect to be suspicious of government-funded pseudo-science, but this post contains a press release from the ‘National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism’ as if ‘terrorism’ has an agreed, neutral definition and which can be ‘studied’:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/09/02/um-report-labels-discovery-channel-incident-environmentally-inspired-suicide-eco-terrorism/
Obviously, the definition of ‘terrorism’ is entirely political – it doesn’t even have to involve violence. Environmentalists have been put away for decades for non-violent acts of ‘eco-terrorism’ against property.
I know, I’m late to this topic… But the stock markets were doing flip flops and that’s when I have to focus on them to eat next month…
So, at any rate, I’d wondered what this guy was ‘demanding’. The MSM was just saying he “had demands” and being silent about what. Now I know why. Thanks. Were it not for this article I’d likely never have found out.
@Smokey (September 2, 2010 at 6:29 pm)
Well, you show me three JPEGs and a PNG. They’re real purty, but are they valid evidence? I have no idea, since I don’t know their provenance. OK, make that little idea, because the first has Joanne Nova’s name on it. I’ve seen some of the work she supports, and I tend to discount it.
But if you, or whoever came up with those four images, think they disprove what you call CAGW, I suggest they be written up in a scientific paper and submitted to some reputable journal. Think of the potential rewards, as a grateful world wakes from the nightmare prospect of having to deal with a wrecked climate and can carry on with business as usual.
You write that “Scientific skeptics [the only honest kind of scientists] need prove nothing.” Perhaps that attitude explains why no one has yet proven to the larger world that the 26 Gigatons of CO2 humans emit each year are nothing to worry about.
You advise me to take my time. I don’t need much time at all. I know that, in the several years of WUWT’s existence, many visitors have posted links to evidence that supports the mainstream view of climate science. That abundant evidence is still out there for the looking, at sites like Skeptical Science. Experience tells me that requests like yours and James Sexton’s are made just to get me to shut up and go away. I may well go away. Reality, however, will not.
@James Baldwin Sexton:
In fact, I do believe that the CO2 humans emit causes warming, and that with enough political will we could turn that around. But I meant that we would defend ourselves against the results of warming, for example by building walls against the rising seas. You seem to have missed that point.