Penn State to lecture on "climate ethics"

In a related seminar, wolves will be lecturing on the best ways to run a hen house.

Its the Gulag for you Anthony.
High crimes against humanity. I guess Climategate 2.0 has e’m pretty riled.

One can only assume this is a reflection on the whole of Penn State. I was taking James Delingpole’s book with a huge grain of salt. Maybe I was mistaken ….

Or how about Michael Mann on the “Proper use of statistical methodologies with time series”?

Well, no stacked deck there then!

one: “the climate change disinformation campaign” – discuss this: who is doing the disinformation and why.
two: “the piratical significance for negotiations in Durban if climate change is understood to create human rights violations” – discuss how relieving the general public of its personal funds over a hoax is not a violation of human rights.
ps. Shouldn’t it read “practical” not “piratical”?

Isn’t it nice to know the world is in such great hands…………….

You just made this up for fun–right?

@More Soylent Green
Aka: One of the coolest years in the past decade (though November is looking to be another big drop in temperature).
I don’t think it supports their position like they think it does.

How about a seminar on how to cover up evidence of child abuse and data abuse?

somewhat off-topic but has anybody here extracted all of the attachments in the emails?

“we will look at the piratical significance for negotiations in Durban” Is that a verbatim quote? Piratical? If so, it’s one of the funnier typos I’ve seen lately.

I can save you the time, here is what they will conclude: Its the same powers that tried to say that smoking was safe it’s nothing new. And all deniers are paid by big oil.

Joe
Do you think they will have a whip-round to pay the money back , ethics aside ?

Brown is not interested in science or data. Every time I’ve written a post providing data that countered his claims he censored it. You can tell from his title ‘Associate Professor Environmental Ethics, Science, and Law, Director,Collaborative Program on Ethical Dimensions of Climate Change, Rock Ethics Institute’ the guy MUST be compensating for some shortcoming. 🙂

My God, these people truly have no shame. Is this behavior some sort of cognitive dissonance or disconnect from reality? Didn’t anyone at Penn State think it might be a good idea to cancel this particular lecture. Brown? Simply amazing.

RE: “It is a bit like getting Al Capone to lecture on, ‘Business Ethics”, isn’t it?”
Al Capone was a proponent of ethical standards. He enforced them vigorously – sometimes with a baseball bat. (Why do “Chicago” and “ethics” seem so odd together in the same sentence. Like “Obama has brought the high ethical standards of Chicago to the Federal government.” Just asking.)
Capone once referred to a Chicago judge. He said “He’s an honest judge. Once he’s bought he stays bought.”

Unless this is a 3-day event of self-flagellation followed by banishment from civilization it must be a joke.

When you have built your “castle in the air” on lies, the only way to keep it in the air is to keep lying.
We can only hope that the “circle of wagons” of the academic/media mafias breaks, or at least can’t keep the volume of lies high enough.
It is pretty clear by now that these folk are, by and large, willing to go their entire careers and retire maintaining lies *that they know are lies*.

Nothing ironic or paradoxical at all. PSU exemplifies the ethics of climatology, just as Goldman Sachs exemplifies the ethics of bankers. If you want to know how to follow the ethical standards of climatologists, Penn State is the best adviser in the world.

Re: 10th hottest year on record. Lot’s of media reportage on this latest assertion. It’s be useful if there was a site that aggregated the official world temperatures from 4 main data collection points.

Coffee spew alert:
National Climate Ethics Statement
To Be Released November 30 On Capital Hill
Senator Barbara Boxer and Rep. Henry Waxman Among List of Speakers
This is our FINAL CALL for signatures. Please send out the message below.
The National Climate Ethics Campaign is pleased to announce that the “Statement of Our Nation’s Moral Obligation to Address Climate Change” will be released Wednesday, November 30 from 1:00-2:30 p.m. in Room 406 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building (The Environment and Public Works Hearing Room).
There are now over 1000 signers now on the climate ethics statement. Please send the message pasted below to organizations, listservs, and people that might endorse it.
If you are in Washington D.C. or vicinity please attend the event. In addition, please urge others know you to attend! Let’s fill the room to tell Congress, the President, and the public that it is our nation’s moral and ethical responsibility to meaningfully address climate change.
Speakers representing a wide range of constituencies will offer their views about our nation’s ethical and moral obligations to address climate change:
Congressman Henry Waxman (D-California)
Virginia State Senator Mary Margaret Whipple (state perspective)
Gary Hirshberg, CEO of Stonyfield Farm (business)
Tim Warman of The National Wildlife Federation (environment)
Jim Ball, VP of The Evangelical Environmental Network (faith)
Joe Uehlein, Labor Network for Sustainability (labor)
Ann Goodman, WNSF (women)
Luisa Saffiotti, Psychologists for Social Responsibility (mental health)
Bobby Pestronk, NACCHO (health)
Lili Molina, Energy Action Coalition (youth)
A speaker representing the NAACP will also speak.
http://climateethicscampaign.org/

Not too far OT – (from theDailyReview.com)
Increased bromide caused by lab error not drilling, researchers say
A study by Penn State researchers is being revised after test results apparently linking increased bromide in some water wells to Marcellus Shale gas drilling were traced instead to a lab error.
An error notice was published on Nov. 22 on the website of the Center for Rural Pennsylvania, which funded the study and released it in late October.
According to the notice, an accredited laboratory contracted by the researchers incorrectly reported the bromide concentration data that was used in the original report. Updated data showed that increased bromide levels were recorded in one of 42 water wells, not seven wells as originally reported.
The one affected water well also showed increased levels of chloride, hardness and other parameters days after a Marcellus well about a quarter-mile away was hydraulically fractured, but “nearly all” of the increased parameters, including bromide, “had nearly returned to pre-drilling concentrations” after 10 months, according to the notice and the original report.
The study of 233 water wells in 20 Pennsylvania counties did not find any statistically significant increases in methane after drilling or evidence of contamination from the most prominent pollutants found in the wastewater that flows out of natural gas wells after hydraulic fracturing.
In the initial report, the study’s authors used the now-discredited bromide finding to advocate tripling the distance around a natural gas well where drillers in Pennsylvania are currently presumed responsible for contamination from 1,000 to 3,000 feet.
Efforts to reach project leader Bryan Swistock, a Penn State water resources extension specialist, were unsuccessful Monday.
According to the error notice, all of the study’s research findings are being reviewed and a revised report will be issued “in the coming weeks.”
The authors were preparing the report for submission to a peer-reviewed journal when it was released by the Center for Rural Pennsylvania in October.

Dear Mr Brown.
In logic classes, I learned that : When one argues from a philosophical perspective – there is no moral or ethical argument that can be associated to a philosophical stance.
It is a fallacy in logic to attempt to convey that there is.
It would take these [ at the minimum ] to change from a philosophical debate to an ethical debate.
1 Causation evidence.
2 Evidence that something can be done to change the outcome..
3 Evidence that not taking the step [ s ] – is unethical.
Surly, as a Lawyer….you understand “evidence”?

To attend the ethical forum, send details of your bank account to my Nigerian colleague who will complete your registration . . .

@Anthony:
Ethics is mob rule. Morality appeals to a divine will. Anyone trying to confuse the two is selling something. If you understand that ‘ethics’ is another word for rhetoric and mob rule, then this lecture makes perfect sense. They are rallying the troops.

“Piratical”
pertaining to Pirates, acting as if a Pirate,
“Pirate”
one who roams around a large area attacking normal people going about their normal work.
History shows us that Pirates dont last too long before being overtaken by authority or rebellion
yours sincerely
Edward Teach (ex Royal Navy) (no, not really)

When these guys start costing universities money, their azzes will be out the door tenure or no tenure.

The Cognitive doesn’t get any more dissonant than this…

Lovely cartoon I was sent:
young son to father, “Dad, I’m considering a career in organised crime.”
Father, looking calmly past his newspaper, “Government or private sector?”

“ethical analysis of the climate change disinformation campaign. ”
This is right up there with people’s republic and socialist republic,
as supreme self-parody. ‘Disinformation’ describes them to a tee.
“We will examine whether this is a new kind of crime against humanity”
Big Government has for centuries been THE crime against humanity,
while capitalism and free markets made all the progress and growth,
whereas government, when done properly, merely enables it.
And yes, the Greens’ ruinous policies ARE a new kind of crime against humanity.
“Second, we will look at the piratical significance for negotiations in Durban if climate change is understood to create human rights violations. ”
Gee, wouldn’t King Canute love the sheer megalomania of CAGW,
and like any Viking king (Viking = Scandanavian pirate)
he knew all about total arrogance:
Vikings were the world’s #1 slavers for three centuries .
As for ‘human rights’ violations’, that accurately describes
the results of their policies of fuel poverty and biofueled starvation.
What about the animal rights of all those bird-slicer victims?

Dave Wendt says:
November 29, 2011 at 3:14 pm
“I haven’t been able to keep up with all the comments regarding this latest release of emails, but from what I’ve seen no one has mentioned this piece which discusses Andy Revkin’s role, as revealed in the emails, when he was still supposedly a “reporter at the NYT.”
Revkin is all over Climate Depot.

ACK!!! First link should be http://php.scripts.psu.edu/dept/rockethics/bios/brown_d.shtml

Perhaps we need to bring THIS research to bear… http://www.livescience.com/17209-creative-thinkers-cheaters.html. If true, especially the way they incentivized them to cheat (through money), then that explains a lot about the Climategate scandal. Obviously we need to reduce the $$ in academia…

Joe Bastardi says:
November 29, 2011 at 2:03 pm
Bravo, Joe!

All I can say is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_M2XWimDl9A&feature=related

29 Nov: Commentary Mag: Alana Goodman: NYT’s Revkin Denies Bias in ClimateGate Coverage
Unsurprisingly, Revkin disagrees, and he asked for a chance to respond. Here’s my email exchange with him (my questions and comments to him are highlighted in bold):..
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/11/29/climategate-revkin-email-bias/

take this, Zwick:
(2 pages) 29 Nov: Forbes: Larry Bell: Climategate II: More Smoking Guns From The Global Warming Establishment
As if the first round of e-mails purloined from the U.K.’s East Anglia University Climate Research Unit (CRU) network weren’t damning enough, the new batch of about 5,000 more obtained through an anonymous source identified as “FOIA” are truly stunning. Many clearly confirm that top IPCC scientists consciously misrepresented and actively withheld important information…then attempted to prevent discovery…
http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2011/11/29/climategate-ii-more-smoking-guns-from-the-global-warming-establishment/

One, an ethical analysis of the climate change disinformation campaign. We will examine whether this is a new kind of crime against humanity?
===
This is the ugly face of ecofascism…

These people have a god given right to be wrong, to say that wrongness and to hold any seminars they choose. We must remember and so should they that science and ethics are separated by a philosophical and logical gulf. See my philosophy of science blog for numerous essays on this topic. That gulf is not bridgeable, in that, what flows from one discipline is not directly applicable to the other. The gulf can be transcended but the bridge is logic. Ethics, also known as moral philosophy, addresses questions about morality—that is, concepts such as good and evil, right and wrong, virtue and vice, justice and crime, etc.
Science can inform, that is provide information, that is the limit of what science can do. Notice, should or aught are not part of this. Science through its attendant philosophy and logic (deductive) is only capable of addressing priori questions. It is not capable of addressing a priori questions or using inductive logic as ethical philosophy or the pseudosciences do.
Therefore the question here must be: is disinformation or misinformation or incorrect information, unethical behavior, untruthfulness, conclusive or practitioners of the “end justifying the means”, unethical and if so under what conditions. To dispute someone’s interpretation of empirical data and information is call disagreement. To call out another on some point of law, logic, fact or what ever has no ethical implications except and unless it can be demonstrated that the failure to do so will result in harm to others. Unreliable numeric models are hardly demonstration of anything. Let the facts fall where they may.
This is simply some kind of publicity stunt and we should not spend any more time on it.

CORRECTION: it’s Environmental Law Center of University of Victoria… NOT UBC

Bill Illis says:
November 29, 2011 at 4:09 pm
Bingo! Ladies and gentlemen, we have a winner!

From 2563 Barrie Pittock of CSIRO
“To my mind that is not as good as getting the offending editors removed and
proper processes in place. Pressure or ultimatums to the publishers might
work, or concerted lobbying by other co-editors or leading authors.”
Nice people at the CSIRO

“One, an ethical analysis of the climate change disinformation campaign. We will examine whether this is a new kind of crime against humanity?”
Yeah, like a ban on DDT or starving people by selling corn for fuel.
Then we’ll examine young boys in the shower, as an ethical issue of when to report your seniors to the proper authority and how to avoid FOIA requests.

Second, we will look at the piratical significance for negotiations in Durban if climate change is understood to create human rights violations.
That’s a Freudian slip if I ever saw one.

Sabastian says:
November 29, 2011 at 2:29 pm
RE: “It is a bit like getting Al Capone to lecture on, ‘Business Ethics”, isn’t it?”
Al Capone was a proponent of ethical standards. He enforced them vigorously – sometimes with a baseball bat. (Why do “Chicago” and “ethics” seem so odd together in the same sentence. Like “Obama has brought the high ethical standards of Chicago to the Federal government.” Just asking.)
Capone once referred to a Chicago judge. He said “He’s an honest judge. Once he’s bought he stays bought.”
____________________________________
I rather deal with the mob. At least they are not trying to crash our civilization, starve babies and burn children alive like Al Gore.

“Penn State to lecture on “climate ethics”
“Penn State to lecture on “shower ethics”
Just different departments on the same campus, both equally disconnected from reality.

Perhaps something Heartland could look into for their next get together:
An Ethical Critique of the Climate Science Disinformation Campaign
A Case Study: UEA and Penn State

Carl Chapman says:
November 29, 2011 at 3:07 pm
How about the ethics of letting people starve to death while the US turns grain into alcohol to burn in cars, in order to reduce CO2 emissions? How many millions of lives could have been saved if the hundreds of billions wasted on this scam were put into medical research, or clean drinking water, or vacinations, or…
___________________________________
And to add insult to injury Goldman Sachs was playing games and driving the prices even higher!!!
How Goldman Sachs Created the Food Crisis –
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/04/27/how_goldman_sachs_created_the_food_crisis?page=0,1
And now we have the Farmland Grab:
George Soros, Al Gore, World Bank, Rothschild, UNIVERSITY ENDOWMENT FUNDS are all buying farmland in Africa, South America and the USA.
http://farmlandgrab.org/

don’t miss this, it is not the kind of ‘record’ that CAGW alarmists want to discuss:
A New US Hurricane Record
http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.com/
On December 4, 2011 it will have been 2,232 days since Hurricane Wilma made landfall along the Gulf coast as a category 3 storm back in 2005. That number of days will break the existing record of days between major US hurricane landfalls, which previously was between 8 Sept 1900 (the great Galveston Hurricane) and 19 Oct 1906. Since there won’t be any intense hurricanes before next summer, the record will be shattered, with the days between intense hurricane landfalls likely to exceed 2,500 days.
If you are in the insurance or reinsurance business and want to stir up a little constructive mischief, you should ask your favorite catastrophe modeling firm or ratings agency to show you the mathematics behind their estimate of the probability of zero intense hurricane landfalls from 2006 to present (both made at the time and what they’d say today). (Hint: Zero. Zip. Nada.).
This remarkable streak has to end sometime, and likely won’t be repeated anytime soon.
Posted by Roger Pielke, Jr. at 11/28/2011 07:52:00 AM

One, an ethical analysis of the climate change disinformation campaign. We will examine whether this is a new kind of crime against humanity?
Second, we will look at the piratical significance for negotiations in Durban if climate change is understood to create human rights violations.
The titles are brilliant imho. Fit for the true situation.
Yes, the disinformers are committing a new crime against humanity.
And yes, climate science has been pirated thereby creating human rights violations.

He sure has “the stare” down pat.

At 1:49 PM on 29 November, Bloke down the pub had asked:

Would any of them recognise climate ethics if it bit them on the nose?

Of course they would. They can’t maintain criminal mens rea without understanding the difference between moral behavior and violation of the law.
I know that the statute of limitations in the U.K. for criminal violation of the FOI statute is only eighteen months (?!!), but what’s the statute of limitations over there for criminal conspiracy to violate the FOI statute, to subborn malfeasance on the part of a government officer charged with enforcement of the FOI law, and to destroy information sought under lawful FOI requests?
Criminal conspiracy is a whole separate offense, isn’t it?

The AGW hype hustle is getting old.

Brown’s background: “During the Clinton Administration, he was program manager for United Nations organizations at the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Office of International Environmental Policy”
Having listened to his public presentation, the phrase propaganda-driven zealot seemed to apply. His public presentation was steeped in emotionalism rather than science. He led off with an anti-scientific method basis for his views, that being the false consensus, which has been debunked and which is irrelevant to science. He offered comments that were based upon disinformation via careful phrasing that was focused on misleading his audience.
His powerpoint presentation included emotion-driven appeals, such as pictures of polar bears. His claims about weather extremes and CAGW have been addressed in WUWT many times as unsupportable by science. But, if propaganda and misleading people are the goals, the facts don’t appear to matter.
He refused to address comments from the audience regarding published science research that rebutted the basis for his claims. His goal appeared to be to indoctrinate those who are swayed by emotionalism and to promote his one-sided political agenda. Unfortunately, his kind of misleading and misrepresenting comments looked to be part of a canned presentation that was likely shown to by others across the country, as part of a larger propaganda campaign effort.

On point number two, perhaps I should send them a link to a critically important graphic to describe this piratical relationship:
http://www.venganza.org/images/spreadword/pchart1.jpg
(temp vs. pirates)

The worse their position gets, the more outrageous their utterances, which makes their position worse….

Thought a definition of thIs, to date, underused but highly apt “climate science” adjective might be in order:
pi·rate (prt)
n.
1.
a. One who robs at sea or plunders the land from the sea without commission from a sovereign nation.
b. A ship used for this purpose.
2. One who preys on others; a plunderer.
3. One who makes use of or reproduces the work of another without authorization.
4. One that operates an unlicensed, illegal television or radio station.
v. pi·rat·ed, pi·rat·ing, pi·rates
v.tr.
1. To attack and rob (a ship at sea).
2. To take (something) by piracy.
3. To make use of or reproduce (another’s work) without authorization.
v.intr.
To act as a pirate; practice piracy.
[Middle English, from Old French, from Latin prta, from Greek peirts, from peirn, to attempt, from peira, trial; see per-3 in Indo-European roots.]
pi·ratic (p-rtk), pi·rati·cal (–kl) adj.
pi·rati·cal·ly adv.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/piratical

Take this as a comment.
Have you ever considered that believers in catastrophic climate change have no inert intelligence?
Have you ever wondered why you know how to spell a complex term just by your cognitive ability?
Do you imagine it would be easier for a camel to pass through the eyelet of a needle than for humankind to understand all of the natural universe?

NEWS FLASH
Climate Indicted for Crimes Against Humanity
Arrest Warrants Issued
By a unanimous vote of the COP17 Ethics Committee (comprised of Zimbabwe, Iran, Syria, Lybia, Sudan and North Korea) and indictment has been issued against “The Climate” for human rights violations.
Committee chairman Robert Mugabe made the stunning announcement.
“We’ve reviewed the evidence,” said Mugabe, “And there is no doubt that the miserable lives led by millions of people in countries such as ours are totaly due to changes brought about by “The Climate”. Further, we find that “The Climate” is a serial killer, having destroyed entire civilizations over centuries of time with tactics such as ice ages. “The Climate” is a terrible foe,” said Mugabe, “but we are willing to do our part and arm ourselves to the teeth in order to bring an end to the reign of terror “The Climate” is causing. We’re calling on all countries to send us as many weapons as possible, guns, tanks, fighter jets… we are on the front lines of this battle with “The Climate” and we stand in defence of the entire world.”
Meanwhile, international arrest warrants have been issued. In a major press conference, Interpol’s chief of communications announced that composite drawings of the criminal would soon be released.
“We don’t know exactly what “The Climate” looks like.” said the Interpol spokesperson, but we’ve got some eye witness reports. Our artists are right now working with those eye witnesses who have survived incidents spurred by the criminal known as “The Climate” such as floods, droughts,heat waves and blizzards. We’ve also called in experts on “The Climate” from such institutions as Penn State. They’ve been looking closely at the drawings so far, and have advised that “The Climate” seems highly erratic, but a clear hockey stick shaped profile is emerging.”
In other new, the EU has abandoned nuclear energy in its entirety, and will be shutting down all nuclear power sources.
“It has to be done,” said EU Commissioner I. M. Fullovit. “These things are dangerous. Do you know that once they are running we don’t know how to shut them down? We’re turning our largest nuclear power source off first, and our scientists have advised that they aren’t even sure how to do it. How much more dangerous can you get?”
Asked which nuclear power source he was speaking of, Commissioner Fullovit angrily shut down the press conference, yelling something about the big yellow thing in the sky. Our reporters are seeking clarification.

My children’s children will understand more about ethics and be in absolute juxtaposition to Donald A Brown’s knowledge of it. The year is 2011. Civilisations have come and gone because of adherence to destructive ethical ideology. Some of us, in 2011, are over scarification of human progression because of a irrational of fear of the unknown. Donald acknowledges that there is uncertainty in climate science, so it’s only his ethics that are under question.

This event says a lot about Brown’s personality. In a nutshell, Brown will explore his personal wonderfulness and then talk about the several unique “energies” that flow from his inner person.
Those energies include a life force that has a light side and a dark side. If he decides to unleash the dark side, all human life will end immediately except for the few he designates as “survivors.”
His great compassion for mankind is another “energy” that enables him to feel the pain of all people in Bangladesh and all impoverished people throughout the world. This great compassion gives him the purely moral strength to strike down those among humanity who have enslaved all the people of Bangladesh and similar places. He will accomplish this with a carbon tax administered by the UN and Julia Gillard.
An “energy” of intimacy creates his love for his colleagues and graduate students, especially the very young and tender among them who are in need of his touch. This “energy” bonds him so fully to the young and tender that others cannot see where professor ends and student begins.
An intellectual “energy” enables him to practice science beyond all the chains that bind mortal men, empiricists, and anyone who is trapped in reality. This “energy” has led him to see that the Uber-Scientist* must live beyond good and evil. The Uber-Scientist will free mankind from the myths of fact, evidence, and reason while the Uber-Ethicist will enable us to use other humans as the crucible in which the Uber-Uber is created.
Hear Ye, Hear Ye! All come to hear and see Professor Brown shine his light on you, hold back against your annihilation, bless you with the carbon tax of his compassion, bond with the blessed among you, and teach you to create and to be the Uber-Scientist, the Uber-Ethicist, and the Uber-Uber. /sarc
If you don’t get “Uber-Scientist,” google Uber-mensch or Ubermensch.

And they want us to believe we are the unethical ones? More shenanigans (albeit deeply troubling ones at that) ;
http://drtimball.com/2011/climatic-research-unit-shameful-peer-review-control-tactics-the-soonbaliunas-debacle/

Well, my gob has been smacked.

It seems to me that if Penn State were to televise the lecture, it would be a shoo-in to win an Emmy for best comedy special.

jorgekafkazar says:
November 29, 2011 at 6:58 pm
“Uh, exactly where in the link can I find Al Gore?”
If you find it difficult linking Al Gore to climate related mitigation schemes you may have a few large gaps between synapses. Just kidding! But I do suggest you read this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/22/world/africa/in-scramble-for-land-oxfam-says-ugandans-were-pushed-out.html?_r=1
Selected paragraphs from above article:
“But in this case, the government and the company said the settlers were illegal and evicted for a good cause: to protect the environment and help fight global warming.
“The case twists around an emerging multibillion-dollar market trading carbon-credits under the Kyoto Protocol, which contains mechanisms for outsourcing environmental protection to developing nations.”

Mike Smith;
Brilliant! Still laughing, and read it three times.

Well, Nick Leeson, who gambled away £827 million and caused the collapse of the UK’s oldest investment bank, is now “active on the keynote / after-dinner speaking circuit where he advises companies about risk and corporate responsibility”, according to Wikipedia.

Pensioners here in the UK are going to die this winter because they cannot afford the escalating food and energy price rises.
If they complain, they are committing a crime against humanity ???

Sounds like an interesting gig. I wonder if they’ll discuss the very recent World Climate Report “adaptation” of the main figure in Schmittner(2011), which hides data in their “adaptation”, as also presented by Pat Michaels in his Forbes article without any mention of “adaptation” or a link to the original paper?
* As published in Science.
* As published in Forbes and World Climate Report.

Now I know who he reminds me of.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/bb/The_shining_heres_johnny.jpg

“Gary Hirshberg, CEO of Stonyfield Farm (business)”
Going to stop buying their products immediately.

One time it rained when I didn’t want it to rain, so my human rights were violated and it was a crime against humanity.

instead of ranting here can someone(s) please write to Penn State????

“(blah) an ethical analysis of the climate change disinformation campaign. We will examine whether this is a new kind of crime against humanity?(blah)”
A question that interests me is the extent that the climate change religion has caused actual suffering – production of biofuels causing third-world hunger, perhaps. Is there any analysis available?
“climate change religion = crime against humanity” might be a meme that would propagate.

“new kind of crime against humanity?”
Gotta love the decorous question mark there, leaving the matter in doubt. Just an inquiry, donchaknow. I’m reminded of George Will’s observation many years ago that you can be sure that an essay or seminar titled “Whither incest?” will not reenforce the existing prohibition against incest.

This is an article that summs it up!
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/284137/scientists-behaving-badly-jim-lacey?pg=2

How can one lecture or argue about something no one understands? Doesn’t modern ethics depend on the situation?

Mike Smith says:
November 29, 2011 at 9:35 pm
Next up on the Penn State lecture series:
“A Hands-on Approach to Male Adolescent Development”. A lecture by Joe Paterno.
“Basic Practices for Integrity in Statistics”. A tutorial in curve bending by Michael Mann.
“The Virtue of Monogamy”. Guess speakers to include Dominique Strauss-Kahn and William J. Clinton.
These people have no shame.
It’s Mike from Kansas.
We took 8 mm movie of people killed on the water by a Tornado 1971 Lake Cheney. 6 of us in 2 other boats lived. With the hockey stick since then, why aren’t there more tornado deaths in your area? We shot video because I was flying a new spinnaker.
My contribution to ethics?
Al (sex poodle) Gore visiting schools with his abstinence education tour.

My name’s Chuck and I’m a “denier”.
Take me away and string me up for not having “faith” in the cause and crimes against humanity ….mea culpa etc etc.
You have to ask, what on earth is going on in these peoples heads when they’re obviously intent on criminalizing anyone who wont bow to their religion?
They’re as bad as any fundamentalist nutcases from any other faith!
It appears that having a difference of opinion is a hanging offense to the likes of these loons.
Its all becoming very worrying that supposedly rational and “scientific” people should start espousing views such as these.
I can only hope that Mr FOIA has such dynamite in the remainder of his zip file that he releases the password soon so the whole madness of the global warmers cause can be shattered, otherwise i fear for the future.

Very interesting comments on this subject. Everyone has their own ideas of what it should be… lol And yes James I read them all.

“New crime against humanity”, huh?
How about discussing the elements of the “climate change science” schemes and practices that wallowed in old crimes against humanity, such as fiscal fraud and racketeering?

DickF says:
November 29, 2011 at 2:23 pm
The inmates have taken over the asylum. I’m getting outta here!
Nope. As I’ve said, the inmates are not only running the asylum, they designed it, built it and staffed it, all to their specifications.
They didn’t HAVE to take it over…
BTW, I’ve taken the liberty to correct the earnest (associate) professor’s job title
Donald A. Brown
Associate Professor Environmental Ethics, Science, and Law,

The Pod Person hypothesis keeps looking better and better.

I suggest you listen to the podcast and ask yourself the question: “Do I want to risk the rest of my life in prison if not hunted down and lynched by the generation that _does_ understand that climate change is real and that will understand the role I played in delaying action to stop it?”
I’m only trying to warn you. Don’t expect violent behaviour from me but do expect it from members of my generation. You and your gang are being closely observed and documented. My generation can read. They’ll know who’s responsible for their misery.
Or look up on YouTube what Bob Inglis said at one climate hearing (quoting someone esle): “Make sure you say that very publicly because I want our grandchildren to read what you said and what I said…”
So keep denying – publicly. Keep actively delaying climate action.
(Go ahead and expose my comment. I don’t see what’s wrong with it…)

if we are allowed a brief comic interlude, this quick video has more ethical content than anything the CAGWarmists have to say:

Some European says:
November 30, 2011 at 11:58 am
Some European (in a brown shirt), bring it.

Of course, I didn’t threaten anyone. But I know y’all can’t read, otherwise you would have understood climate science long ago…
Have a nice day!

Some European says:
December 1, 2011 at 5:29 am
If you read so well, look up “projection” in the psychology section of your institution.
Then look up “evidence” and “critical thinking”. You seem unaware of all three terms.

Michael Mann has more hair than Penn State has ethics!