Delingpole's new landing pad, the inside scoop

Telegraph’s loss is Breitbart’s gain.

The Telegraph is Dead to Me.
Not a Pause…an End.
(And they still print the sadly senile Geoffrey Lean.)

The ‘Right Wing Club for the Good Ol’ Boys’ continues its online love in……..
Delingpole was late to the Climate Change Party and thinks that it started with ‘Climategate’.
Well: it didn’t. It started a decade earlier.
This isn’t about heroism, it’s about political credit.
Delingpole is a typical American joining a 20th century world war. Late to the party but demanding all the credit.

97% of MSM journalists conform because that’s the way hey think they’ll rise to the top.
3% tell the truth.
I wonder where I read those statistics before?

I used to happily pay for a subscription to the Telegraph. Now I am glad that simply going into my firefox options and deleting the Telegraph cookies means I can read it for what it is worth. Free.

Fortunately I’d finished breakfast before seeing that Skeptical Science mashup again. But you’ve got under their skins. Respect and thanks, Anthony and James

Perhaps Rhys Jaggar should do more research on J. Delingpole before posting.
(If only not to appear ignorant.)

I wish James Delingpole every success. He may have come a little late to his position on man-made global warming…but then so did I after many years of believing what the BBC and my newspapers were telling me. He may be the Court Jester of Skepticism but as a consequence has attracted much more attention than other more staid figures. Absolutely overall a force for good. And pretty fearless, which is rare.
It is a bit unfortunate for us single issue campaigners on “climate change” that he is such a red-blooded libertarian, but you cannot have everything!

I don’t know why the Tele do this. I used to buy it every Tuesday when I lived in London because Mark Steyn had a column. Then they got rid of him.
Now Delingpole. As mentioned above if Booker goes that is the end.
I have to say though, that I do very much enjoy Geoffrey Leans column…. just not for the reasons he would like.

Off topic but I wonder whether twits like Rhys Jaggar ever try to tell the Chinese about people arriving ‘late’ to WW2.

I read the Telegraph for years (following my father’s example), and it used to have a delightful dry sense of humour but it has been going downhill for years (possibly when the Barclay Brothers got it). Any paper with Mary Riddell writing in it can’t be taken seriously. I stopped reading it years ago and James’ departure just reinforces my views.

Rhys Jaggar says:
February 18, 2014 at 11:17 pm
“Delingpole is a typical American joining a 20th century world war. Late to the party but demanding all the credit.”
You should be very careful with the word “demanding”.
Delingpole demands nothing of anyone; rather the international Green movement with their leader science czar John Holdren of EcoScience fame in the White House demands population reduction, tax increases, de-industrialisation and the expropriation of private property via Agenda 21; furthermore the worldwide ban of nuclear technology and GM technology (as demanded by Greenpeace).

Rhys Jagger:
Well, yes, our friends in the Virginian Colonies were a little late at arriving in WW2 in some respects, however they were giving Britain a lot of support in many other ways. When they did eventually arrive, as the result of a most unruly prod from behind, they were also a little slow at first, but a giant takes time to get moving, slowly at first, then a little quicker, with every step, until they were eventually in full spate. The 300,000+ graves in France alone might just enlighten you as to the tremendous cost in Human sacrifice they gave to liberating Europe from tyranny, just so you could say what you want to say, & in English instead of German (No offence to Germans anywhere, I speak a little myself)!!! Oh & that was for the SECOND time in the 20th Century!!!!

The flooding fiasco this winter is making many British people wake up to the reality of the ugly misanthropy of the eco-fascist Khmer Vert movement. It is indeed well over time that free societies “get rid of all the green crap”. Karl Popper’s contribution to WW2 was to write the book “The Open Society and its Enemies”. Its message remains vital today, the eco-fascists are the biggest threat to democracies.
Some quotes from Popper, The Open Society and its Enemies:
If we are uncritical we shall always find what we want: we shall look for, and find, confirmations, and we shall look away from, and not see, whatever might be dangerous to our pet theories. In this way it is only too easy to obtain what appears to be overwhelming evidence in favor of a theory which, if approached critically, would have been refuted.
Whenever a theory appears to you as the only possible one, take this as a sign that you have neither understood the theory nor the problem which it was intended to solve.
There is an almost universal tendency, perhaps an inborn tendency, to suspect the good faith of a man who holds opinions that differ from our own opinions. … It obviously endangers the freedom and the objectivity of our discussion if we attack a person instead of attacking an opinion or, more precisely, a theory.
Science may be described as the art of systematic over-simplification — the art of discerning what we may with advantage omit.
Other quotes:
“The collectivists . . have the zest for progress, the sympathy for the poor, the burning sense of
wrong, the impulse for great deeds, which have been lacking in latter-day liberalism. But their
science is founded on a profound misunderstanding, and their actions, therefore, are deeply
destructive and reactionary. So men’s hearts are torn, their minds divided, they are offered
impossible choices.
Walter Lippmann.
“To the debacle of liberal science can be traced the moral schism of the modern world which so tragically divides enlightened men”
Walter Lippmann.
“The chief danger to our philosophy, apart from laziness and woolliness, is scholasticism, … which is treating what is vague as if it was precise. . .”
F. P. Ramsey.”

Thank you dbstealey.

I’ve just ordered The Little Green Book from Amazon.

I am hoping James will skewer the Greens over this piece of Stalinism:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-26187711
Quote:
‘Greens call for clear-out of ‘climate change deniers’ reads the headlines, it’s actaully quite concerning.

The Soviet Union won WW2 by kicking it’s way into Berlin after the greatest land battle in history…

Another Telegraph blogger, Sean Thomas, wrote the funniest lampoon of wramists I have ever read. It’s at http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/seanthomas/100222487/when-it-comes-to-climate-change-we-have-to-trust-our-scientists-because-they-know-lots-of-big-scary-words/

Richard111 – Spectator! Just taken on a year’s online subscription (the free bottle of premier cru [no less] champagne in the post was, I admit, a slight encouragement) and reckon it’s excellent value though the free offering is pretty fair too. No, I have no connection with it of any kind but do feel like giving it a thumbs up as my first ever online subscription . Editor Fraser Nelson strikes me as a genuinely independent spirit as indicated by the range of opinion expressed in the magazine. Founded in 1828, it’s (I think) the oldest magazine still in print. Booker, Delingpole and others do contribute on occasion though it is of course a general interest publication.

His writing style is hilarious, he points out the illogical behavior of these groups

The Allied victory in WWII was a team effort. Here is an important statistic: 7/8 of German division months were in the east. The battle in the east dwarfed the battle in the west. But many Americans have no knowledge at all of the war in the east, and think we won WWII. So Rhys Jaggar’s comment about “a typical American” is a fair comment.

James did tweet that he’d toned down his first brietbart article. Can’t wait for when he properly let’s rip. 😉

I think as long as the CAGW wacko’s keep trying to control the narrative and language calling us climate deniers, we should start calling them rightfully– “climate parasites” — because they siphon money from average taxpayers to promote their point of view:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/02/climate_parasites_the_answer_to_climate_change_deniers.html

John Mann says:
February 19, 2014 at 4:06 am
“I’m sceptical about climate change. I’m even somewhat sceptical about Wikipedia. But if Delingpole is correct, then we have a Wikipedia article on a scientific subject which is completely and utterly misleading.”
That’s par for the course for wikipedia. Look up John Holdren. In 1975 or so he co-authored a mighty tome, EcoScience, with the Ehrlichs. Now try to find the wikipedia page about EcoScience. There is none. It is a legendary book where Ehrlichs and Holdren discussed all coercive and non-coercive ways to bring down the population to 1 billion.
If you thought the wikipedia’s “NPOV” means that wikipedia’s “neutral”… well… need a bridge?
For another take on acid rain see also Bjorn Lomborg’s The Skeptical Environmentalist. He also has something else to say than the wikipedia.
Wikipedia is always, always conformist.

Bart says:
February 19, 2014 at 2:59 am
“I say, you don’t give credit to the guys who helped start the fire. In my book, the Brits were the real heroes.”
The Brits surely did “help to start the fire”. Without going into details, they had their motive; competition; a desire to save their empire (which obviously failed).
“Germany is too strong. We must destroy her.” — Winston Churchill, November, 1936.

Are we really glorifying someone who wrote a piece of sh*t column in which he suggests that we should kill sharks, just because some spoiled little *sshole want to surf? How low can you go??
REPLY: The opposite argument is – are we really going to pay attention to somebody that uses two cuss words in a single sentence to get a point across because they have no cognizant argument? I think not. – Anthony

Thank you for the alert on Mr. Delingpole’s new blog, Mr. Watts!

Rhys Jaggar says: @ February 18, 2014 at 11:17 pm
….Delingpole was late to the Climate Change Party and thinks that it started with ‘Climategate’….
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
At least he woke up when hit over the head by some facts and has the integrity to write and publish those facts.
Most news media writers are bought and paid for and if they do not stay bought they get fired.
We farmers learned that the hard way during the ‘Farm Wars’ a decade ago.
HE who OWNS the press controls the press not the writers, and most media is owned by large corporations who have bankers on the board of directors.
You can do the digging yourself. The major news and other corporations have officers and the board of directors published on-line.
There is also this: The Network of Global Corporate Control which is also published by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis The Network of Global Corporate Control (If you have criticism of that “sad little paper” _Jim you can give your corrections @ that website.)

I find it fascinating the way liberal publications would rather maintain ideological purity than actually make a profit.
I suppose they believe that they will be rewarded by their allies in the govt for their sacrifices.
Unfortunately, they are probably correct.

DirkH
“If you thought the wikipedia’s “NPOV” means that wikipedia’s “neutral”… well… need a bridge?
For another take on acid rain see also Bjorn Lomborg’s The Skeptical Environmentalist. He also has something else to say than the wikipedia.
Wikipedia is always, always conformist.”
I knew that it was conformist. I knew that it wasn’t strictly neutral. I knew that it was biased.
But deliberately misleading? On an article about science?
The article at http://insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/article/is_wikipedia_biased says “Maintaining what Wikipedia calls “the neutral point of view” (or NPOV) is relatively easy when writing about science topics or otherwise objectively verifiable subjects. But in other topics, such as politics and history, bias and controversy inevitably arise.”
The article about Acid Raid is about a science topic. But if Delingpole is correct, it is not just biassed, it is seriously and deliberately misleading.
Anyone with no ax to grind who reads both Delingpole and Wikipedia on Acid Rain is going to see that the Wikipedia article has 39 footnotes and decide that Delingpole is a joker.
As for Lomborg – he wrote his book 15 years ago, and all the evidence suggests that the scientific community taken it very seriously.

snow says:
February 19, 2014 at 1:40 am
…. Do our tax dollars help pay for these agw scientist research grants.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
Of course!
The Big Winners in the Climate Change Money Game
Federal Climate Change Funding from FY2008 to FY2014 (20 page .PDF report)
https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43227.pdf
(I have not opened that PDF. It is from:
http://us.resiliencesystem.org/federal-climate-change-expenditures-report-congress
Also see Jo Nova’s The climate industry wall of money
“Money for the Climate Industry: The US government spent $79 billion on climate research and technology since 1989… the Australian Government put $13.9 million into just one quick advertising campaign.”
There is more information if you sift through THIS.
Even the World Wildlife Fund, Inc., an arm of World Wildlife Fund International gets government grants. From Donna Laframboise The WWF’s Vast Pool of Oil Money
“The World Wildlife Fund’s first corporate sponsor was Shell oil – which continued to fund it for the next four decades.” not surprising given The Royals of the Netherlands own a large chunk of Shell and HRH Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands was the first president of WWF.

Bart says:
February 19, 2014 at 2:59 am
Rhys Jaggar says:
February 18, 2014 at 11:17 pm
“Delingpole is a typical American joining a 20th century world war.”
Mmmmm… Unh-uh.
Alan the Brit says:
February 19, 2014 at 2:12 am
Well, yes, we do feel we played a key role. But, many of us are well aware that Britain was sine qua non. Had the Brits not held virtually alone in the darkest days, there would have been no safe routes for American troops and material to arrive.
I’ve had arguments with friends who insist that, by virtue of suffering the most, the Soviet Union really won the war, you don’t give credit to the guys who helped start the fire. In my book, the Brits were the real heroes.
This has unfortunately gone off topic & for that I apologise. Richard S. Courtney is right, this has nothing to do with JD’s move.
I will say this, the points made about what the US contributed are valid, but Britain was also supplying the Soviet Union with equipment via the Arctic Convoys through treacherous bitterly cold seas to do so (something only now in the UK is shamefully being acknowledged). Curiously enough the UNIPCC acknowledges that the Arctic was warmer than it is today back in the 1940s, although I suspect those who served in those convoys may not agree from a certain viewpoint! Finally, what Britain & the USA did in the West may not have compared in size or scale to those events in the east, at least our troops were motivated by a sense of freedom & democracy, not a bullet in the head for refusing to commit open suicide, the Russians were brutally savage as much with there own people as with the enemy!

John Tillman says:
February 19, 2014 at 5:49 am
Gamecock says:
February 19, 2014 at 5:00 am
The Allied victory in WWII was a team effort. Here is an important statistic: 7/8 of German division months were in the east. The battle in the east dwarfed the battle in the west. But many Americans have no knowledge at all of the war in the east, and think we won WWII. So Rhys Jaggar’s comment about “a typical American” is a fair comment.
Rhys Jaggar’s comment isn’t fair. It’s ignorant. Delingpole is not an American.
You, Gamecock, are apparently also unaware that the USSR could not have defeated those German divisions without US aid. To take but one of many examples, Khrushchev admitted that the Red Army could not even have traveled from Stalingrad to Berlin, let alone fought its way there, without the hundreds of thousands of trucks, jeeps & tanks we sent them. This largess should have stopped when the USSR let Germany destroy the Polish Home Army, but it didn’t. It kept flowing even after the US & UK needed those vehicles in France, lack of which slowed our advance. To this add vast bounty in food, boots, aircraft, steel, you name it, most sent at great cost in lives & treasure on the deadly Murmansk Run.
Britain would have been starved into submission in 1940 & 1941 by German forces in the Battle of the Atlantic without US aid in merchant seamen & ships, naval escorts, Royal Navy ship repair, Lend Lease supplies, food & materiel. Not to mention volunteers & av gas in the Battle of Britain & planes & superior tanks in the Desert.
Since we’ve been dragged into another WW2 discussion here’s my pennyworth:
America were certainly the biggest winners from the war. But neither in the Pacific nor in Europe they was the USA the principle or even largest protagonist. Japan’s commitment of troops against America was smaller than against China. And Germany’s effort against the western allies was dwarfed by that against Russia.
Talking about transport, Russia indeed relied on American vehicles just as Germany – initially much less mechanized than the western allied and more reliant on horses – rode into Russia mostly in French vehicles captured by the surrender by France of an almost pristine war inventory. Barbarossa was almost Franco-German (as the eventual defence of the Reich was Franco-Belgian-German etc.) – a true foretaste of the European Union.
It must be clarified, sadly, that the British Arctic convoys, though supremely heroic, were insignificant to Russia’s war effort compared to the American imports by rail via Iran (“Persia”). It was the wrong sort of material and too little and in the wrong place.
It was more luck than destiny that America both joined the war and joined on the side of England. There is nothing new about loathing of British in America. As documented in the recent book “those angry days” by Lynne Olson, in the pre-war years there was a sizeable faction in the USA which sided with Germany not England, including most notably Charles Lindbergh. In China the USA’s vision was so blinded by the mist of Anglophobia (especially that of general Joseph Stilwell) that they believed the good guys were Mao and the communists and worked against the British army in Burma. Towards the end of the European war America sided increasingly with Stalin against Churchill. An yes – Britain only stopped paying interest to the USA for war debt less than a decade ago.
DirkH – with all due respect you cant argue Britain was in any way a protagonist for WW2 except after the war had already been made inevitable – by Germany. Whatever he might have said in 1936, at that time he was as marginal a figure in British politics as James Delingpole is today.
As for England’s code-breakers, yes they were clever chaps, but Stalin had no need of any British communication to him of the Bletchley Park code-breaking output since Britain was thoroughly infiltrated by Soviet spies. Russia began the cold war before WW2 had ended, Churchill and the western leaders were laughably naïve in this respect, not realizing for instance that at conferences such as Yalta and Teheran all their rooms were bugged – by Stalin’s own son. (When Churchill told Stalin of the atom bomb he was looking forward to a big reaction. When there was none he thought Stalin did not understand. But he probably had known of it before Churchill.)
As for the Soviets being so heroic, recent research has made it clear that in the absence of confrontation with US and British troops, they had plans to advance all the way to the English channel and into Italy.
A good source of info on all this is the new book by Anthony Beevor, the history of ww2.

My wife and father in law are both journalists – well, my wife WAS, but she found she could make a LOT more as, wait for it…… a violin instructor. Actually she teaches Celtic Fiddling AND violin at a college near home as well as a home studio, and THAT pays better than being a full time journalist did. My father in law is retired.
Both, BTW are appalled at the way there is no reporting on the actual story behind things such as ClimateGate and other juicy follow-ups. To them, those are news. There are salable stories and they are incredulous that there is virtually nothing said about the bad bahaviour of AGW champions.
/the unbiased American Press.. Yeah, right.

You have enemies? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life. – Winston Churchill

Richard Courtney,
Thanks for that. Would that be the book “Acid Politics” – or is there another paper?
Basically, the problem is that non-specialists are going to say “Sonja Boehmer-Christiansen says one thing, but that is a heterodox opinion.” Connolley represents orthodoxy. So when the average person reads Delingpole’s book, why would he take it seriously if he then has a quick look at Wikipedia?
I don’t doubt that Wikipedia is biased. The way one checks it, of course, is to read what it says about something one knows something about. So, to take two examples, I’d have to say that the article about Andrew Montford and the one about his book “The Hockey Stick Illusion” seem to be pretty fair to me. So how do does the non-specialist know that the one about Acid Rain is misleading?
John

Good to see Deli is still in the public eye, still baiting those Greens.
I noticed his output had dropped off a bit in recent months, so I’m not too surprised he’s moved on. To be honest, not heard of Breitbart before, so just flitted over there for a good perusal. Certainly full of “red meat conservatism,” and looks to be filling a gap in the market since the increasing wetness of the traditional conservative press – yes DT, I’m talking about you.
Whether Breitbart takes off over here, remains to be seen, but I wish them well.

I concur with the lament that Delingpole has been marginalized by relegation to a less popular, albeit agreeably clearsighted and combative, medium. But no matter how supportive and congenial Breitbart is, preaching to the choir is no less irrelevant for skepticism than for true belief. That’s a shame and a big loss. Delingpole is an absolutely brilliant satirist, epitomizing the best of the school, from Voltaire and Swift to Wilde and Mark Twain. He belongs to the world: our world. Ecrasez l’infame, James!
He also deserves — needs — much better exposure. I sincerely hope his new publisher has the enterprise, push and resourcefulness to get Delingpole’s columns syndicated in every newspaper, popular journal, and website that has the good sense, honesty and integrity to run them.
How about it, Breitbart? Will you do the honorable, the right thing, and broadcast his words?

richardscourtney says:
February 19, 2014 at 7:26 am
—-
Fascism is a form of socialism, there is nothing right wing about it.

Ian H says:
February 19, 2014 at 1:52 am
Unfortunately Breitbart isn’t a real news agency, just a right wing propaganda website. Maybe he can write stories about the Friends of Hamas.
You are smoking crack. Read Breitbart’s book Righteous Indignation to find out why it was created in the first place. All MSM but Fox News are controlled by liberal people…

” MarkW says:
February 19, 2014 at 10:36 am
richardscourtney says:
February 19, 2014 at 7:26 am
—-
Fascism is a form of socialism, there is nothing right wing about it.”
Agreed…. Hitler was NOT Right Wing. That is a very big falsehood the left is always
trying to pass off as truth. He was one of theirs.

Richard…. FYI. The National Socialist Workers Party of Germany, otherwise known as the Nazi Party, was indeed socialist, and it had a lot in common with the modern left. Hitler preached class warfare, agitating the working class to resist “exploitation” by capitalists — particularly Jewish capitalists, of course. Their program called for the nationalization of education, health care, transportation, and other major industries. They instituted and vigorously enforced a strict gun control regimen.

BTW….. Love Delingpole…. will be buying his book 🙂

Whether it be global warming or some other falsehood promulgated against people of a more “freedom-loving” persuasion, need to correct these errors when they occur.

Should give Breitbart.com some link juice then by changing the link in the right sidebar.

Gamecock says:
February 19, 2014 at 5:00 am
The fact that German war efforts were concentrated in the East is because that area was the main interest of their desire for lebensraum. In the West, it was only a matter of a few months to finish off most of Western Europe. There was little need for military ground action in Western Europe from mid 1940 until mid 1944 (with a few exceptions at the fringes like Italy, Africa, Greece, Yugoslavia, it was mostly air war).
Also note that the USSR didn’t bother with Japan until the war was a few days from ending. The USSR would have had little chance of success without Allied war materiel and massive strategic errors on the part of Germany’s fearless leader.

John Tillman says:
February 19, 2014 at 5:49 am
“But more importantly, it was French & British pacifism (understandable after the horrors of the Great War) & appeasement in 1936-38, plus Soviet collusion with Hitler in 1939-41, that let the war start in the first place. Before that, the punitive terms of the Versailles Treaty insisted upon by France aided Hitler’s rise to power.”
Stalin broke five alliances with other nations and started one up with Hitler to take over Poland and other Baltic states. His help surely made the war far easier for Hitler and the savaging by Stalin’s NKVD must have made the Gestapo proud.
http://uralica.com/eastbalt.htm
I am a little sensitive on this issue…re my handle

Richard,
Thanks for your post of February 19, 2014 at 9:33 am, and my apologies for appearing to go off topic.
(FWIW, I don’t think I was completely off topic. My point was that Delingpole may speak the truth, but the way he does it really is not calculated to win over those who start out accepting the current orthodoxy. Most people who accept the current orthodoxy on AGW and acid rain, but who are reasonably open minded, would pick up Delingpole’s Little Green Book and after a quick skim, dismiss it as quickly as they would dismiss a Ken Ham creationist tome. However – an open minded observer, who sat down and read Andrew Montfort, on the other hand, would be much more likely to question their own prior assumptions. You and I may take the view that Delingpole knows what he is talking about, but I know several people who would simply dismiss him on the basis of the Little Green Book. And in particular, they would not take his perspective on acid rain seriously because what the standard sources say bears no resemblance to what Delingpole is saying.)
John

Delingpole is a typical American joining a 20th century world war. Late to the party but demanding all the credit.
Personally I think it is past time that the Europeans quit suck at the teat of American prosperity and fund their own health care systems including drugs and their own security.
Next time it would be wise if the USA stayed on the sidelines.
Putin is your next best friend anyway.
And why did Patton get fired?

Oops – meant to say –
quit sucking …

M Courtney
strong central power is the antithesis to what is now thought of as right wing.
If you want to understand what the Orwellian’s call right wing. I would suggest reading or watching some Milton Friedman. Lots of great youtube videos on him.
In the the real world we are actually the Classic liberals

richardscourtney says: “It seems you cannot desist from disrupting the thread from its subject.”
You asked a question and I answered it. Not liking my answer doesn’t mean I was disrupting.
Threads ALWAYS get diverted from topic. It is the way human conversations work.
Just your question along proves that.

richardscourtney says: “..you were deliberately trolling to divert the thread..”
I am sorry, I tried to answer your question.
I will refrain from doing that in the future.

_Jim says: @ February 19, 2014 at 9:42 am
Does little good when the misinformation appears here; owed to someone who sees ‘corporatists’ and specific, planned, intentional mal-intent ‘perched’ and ready to spring from behind every rock (close to how the saying used to go …)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
_Jim after several years of you inane factless sniping I can only conclude that I am hitting very close to the bone and someone is upset.

What is funny or sad M Courtney well keep telling us what we believe.

M Courtney says: @ February 19, 2014 at 2:04 pm
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That is why I describe myself as a civilize being and side step the left and right wing totalitarian fanatics. (It is also useful for driving _Jim crazy, my favorite past time.)

Richard S. Courtney is correct that this thread has been hopelessly diverted off-topic, but I have to admit the diversion has been interesting.
More relevant, however is this from Bob B:

February 19, 2014 at 5:50 am
I think as long as the CAGW wacko’s keep trying to control the narrative and language calling us climate deniers, we should start calling them rightfully– “climate parasites” — because they siphon money from average taxpayers to promote their point of view:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/02/climate_parasites_the_answer_to_climate_change_deniers.html

‘Climate Parasites’. I like it. An apt name for the fear-mongering Climate Alarmists and their army of Useful Idiots in the media and academia who promulgate a deliberate hoax to enrich themselves and deprive millions of cheap energy and prosperity.
Let’s use it!
/Mr Lynn

greenfry should be – http://greenfyre.wordpress.com/about/

Mr Lynn and Bob B ‘Climate Parasites’
We can call them what we want on this site. But never in history our side been able to control the narrative.