So, as WUWT readers well know, I have a different opinion about global warming.
Do you think the New York Times should endorse stabbing me (and others with similar opinions) through the heart like a vampire because I hold that opinion? See panel #4 “self destructing sabers for dispatching climate-change deniers”.
Source: http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2014/02/09/opinion/sunday/see-something-say.html?_r=2
Admittedly, this is a lame attempt at humor/satire, something we are all well familiar with applying here at WUWT. But, imagine if the tables were turned, and the cartoon depicted global warming alarmists such as Mike Mann or James Hansen in the same role? Our friends would have a collective cow. Yet, somehow, somebody at the New York Times thinks it is acceptable to suggest “dispatching” a whole class of people that hold a different viewpoint from them.
I’m waiting on I have a comment from NYT’s Andrew Revkin, who was the subject of a post yesterday, as to what he thinks about this in his own newspaper.
For the record, I don’t think global warming is a “hoax”, but it certainly has been oversold.
h/t to Steve Milloy at Junkscience.com
UPDATE: Andrew Revkin sends this comment via email:
I find the final panel in this cartoon on uses for surplus icicles to be the antithesis of humor. But some artists, like some bloggers, seem to thrive on edge pushing. Andres Serrano (“Immersion: Piss Cross”) comes to mind. There are many others. We are quite a species.
UPDATE2: Revkin has added some additional thoughts at his tumblr blog:
It’s worth saying more. This cartoon is right up there with the “pretty edgy” 2010 climate-campaign video showing a teacher blowing up students who didn’t sign on to cut their carbon footprints.
Both are great attention getters, and were utterly stupid if the goal was do accomplish anything other than inflaming and dividing people on an important issue. And that would be a reprehensible goal.
It seems to be the New York way. Governor Cuomo just a few weeks ago said that there was “no room” for conservatives in NY state. Now this. They want to do away with the opposition. Forget that this has got the cover of ostensibly being a joke. Forget that, because that’s what many of them really would like, to KILL skeptics en masse, kind of a final solution to use as their “scientific” theories are proving to be flat out hogwash, and their data tampering and control of the media are inadequate as a means to get their draconian anti-human policies enacted.
I see a completly different joke than most of the readers here. Even under threat the sceptic spits out his cigar and gives a speedy answer to the alarmist. May’be his daughter or his wife, because he seems to know her attitude. And, he is committed to his view.
The bottom part of Panel 4
Just past the grisly scenes:
He’s heard “SASE” before
But knows not what it means
He’s got those “self-” aimed envelopes
Sent to the government
You place SASE in, you dopes!
Included in what’s sent!
But obviously, the sharper point
Beyond what’s on the ice
This climate cult is out of joint;
A pestilence.
Like lice.
===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle
Dear Mr.Watts,
although a member of the ‘stalinistic’ ‘f*** the EU’ states I really do appreciate Your hard engagement, and that of your combatters,
in that contemporary herculian withstanding on ‘climate wars’.
Thanks for standing, for brillantness, for faith + truth.
Hans
As the AGW’s are the true Climate Change Deniers, so … (Isn’t drugs regulated in the US anymore, pleasing neoliberals …?)
pat says:
February 23, 2014 at 9:25 am
Well I didn’t say it was high humor.
______________________
That’s true and your viewpoint has greatly broadened the range of commentary in this thread.
Thanks.
Warmer fanatics could fall on their own icicles at the dishonour of being so wrong
For the record: I am not a “climate change denier”. Climate change has been happening long before we showed up on the scene, it’s happening right now and it will continue to happen long after we’re historical footnotes. Earth does that, you know.
The thing I question– if not outright deny– is the extent that humans are capable of causing climate change on a worldwide basis. I think it takes an awful lot of — something– to suggest that we have the power to either cause catastrophic global warming or to stop it. Local climate, yeah, we may be able to do something good or bad about that. Look at China’s smog problem for an example of people poisoning their local climate. We were on our way to the same problem here in the States before we cleaned up our act, now you can actually see through the air instead of seeing the air. But, the idea that we are capable of causing– or stopping– worldwide climate change— good luck with that, you’re gonna need it.
What is then this “Carbon Pollution”?
A sinister, evil collusion?
CO2, it is clean,
Makes it grow, makes it green,
A transfer of wealth, a solution.
From my blog: http://lenbilen.com/2014/02/22/co2-the-life-giving-gas-not-carbon-pollution-a-limerick-and-explanation/
But they told me I had no heart.
I’m so confused.
Anthony: So you do not think Global Warming is a ‘hoax’ Please explain youself!
Its been too long since i studied interpretive literature or constitutional law but isn’t the more obvious theme the murder weapon will melt? Or will it? Setting aside the obvious poor taste, it is funny. But you know what they say about bringing an icicle to a gun fight… (also a joke).
Is this any different from wanting to use the same icicles to stab, let’s say , gay people, those of different coloured skins, or those who don’t go to the same Sunday school?
“Save the planet, my AR5”. This is fascism.
Bryan A says:
February 23, 2014 at 8:38 am
I can see Pat’s point though. It starts off with what to do with ice “icicle surplus”
Well, a more thoughtful possibility would be to take the “icicle surplus” and
plunge it into the warmth that is hiding in the deep oceans.
“Self destructing icicles” are the best! You do not have to hide their decline..the evidence evaporates away.
A very smart French fellow researcher from Polytechnique School, Serge Galam, suggested that civil war was on the agenda of those pushing the Climate Theory and argumented his opinion in his 2009 book ” Les Scientifiques ont Perdu le Nord”. He was derided by most. Yet, the kind of language againts climate realists and its trivialization by the proponents of the Cause, the illustrations and calls for a cull, from the 350 blowing up kids video to Hansen, Suzuki’s jail calling show that 5 y later, Galam’s suggestion was prescient. Watch out!
Seriously, to someone new to the “Global Warming” debate, it may seem that skeptics are over-reacting here.
However, those of us who have seen over the years the hypocrisy from the believers in the Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming by CO2 (CAGW by CO2) emissions are very much justified in our reaction.
Examples: Every time there is/was a high temperature somewhere, ice melting somewhere, a storm surge somewhere, a strong wind somewhere, etc. we’ve listened to how it is more proof of CAGW by CO2.
But if we point out a low temperature somewhere, ice re-forming somewhere, or similar, we are just being foolish because no one isolated incident proves anything.
Well, except when the isolated incident is warming.
Funny … seems no one has made the connection to the DHS -the Department of Homeland (that still sounds *so* retarded IMO) Security- “If You See Something, Say Something™” campaign as spelled out here:
ALL Bolding above mine for emphasis.
Of course, this is all part of a ‘much bigger plan’ (/sarc), as we again found out this week when we learned:
The NYTimes, I’m sure, can hardly wait. (NO sarc) They are in bed with the feds already, this just provides needed/convenient cover not existing at the moment …
Sorry for the Gail-like-length post. <wink>
.
But some artists, like some bloggers, seem to thrive on edge pushing.
Here, the edge is no longer pushed. It has been passed over in its entirety and the once pusher, now passer is in free-fall. A not-so-happy landing is inevitable.
Reply to those who do not have access to the NY Times ==> The cartoon to which Anthony and Bob Greene (at JunkScience) so object, is found on the Opinion page of the NY Times Sunday Review under the sub-section: “See Something Say Something” (Kupperman and Rees’s political cartoon strip at the Times) and the sub-title: Strategies for Dealing With the 2014 Icicle Surplus By MICHAEL KUPPERMAN and DAVID REES accompanied by the text: “The Department of Commerce offers some uses for this winter’s ubiquitous accessory.”
I think this cartoon, while itself certainly in poor taste, is meant to provoke reactions of both sides of the climate debate aisle….imagine accusing Molly P.C. Moderate of wanting to attack and murder her colleague down the hall with an icicle over a disagreement about climate change!
[I know, I know, it gets different when people show up at your home or office, and I sympathize. I once held a job with a group that was the target of crazies for other reasons and it was my job to stand between the group and the crazies as they came in the door. ]
There’s second image, about the Farm Bill, at http://tinyurl.com/K-R-FarmBill featuring starving poor school children.
Pamela Gray says:
I also find nothing funny about violent and derogatory cartooning of one’s enemies on the opposite side of a debate.
Debate, what debate? They officially “refuse” to debate the issue. Knowing damned well that any “anti-science” “klimat denayer” even half versed in science will wipe the floor with them, they have to play intellectual hide-and-seek.
Stab those who disagree. Sure the most resounding evidence that “the science is settled”.
We must act NOW, stab someone before it’s too late. !!
The blatant partiality and hypocrisy of the New York Times and NPR in this area has gotten so bad that I find I can no longer stand either.
NPR has completely violated its mandated role as a reporter of news and has become a one-sided, broadcast platform of nearly incessant climate propaganda. While routinely purging listener comments protesting the barrage of forecasts of imminent doom from Thermageddon, they allow comments advocating mass murder— http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/02/18/278983058/pussy-riots-nadya-and-masha-report-being-detained-in-sochi#comment-1249707692
I say someone takes a few minutes and tests it out
That is, change all the words slightly to reflect something along the lines of “Fun things to do with icicles now that CAGW has been discredited” with the end panel stating “self destructing sabers for dispatching corrupt climatologists” (and the last image could be followed by “take it a step further and mail the ‘evidence’ to confused local authorities. …just make sure you use gloves when touching the envelope!)
Start distributing it on Twitter (where most people have likely missed the original) sit back and watch a couple Leftist/CAGW sites eventually run with it as being a sign of the “horrific images from inside the mind of science deniers” or whatever (might even make MSNBC!)
Maybe wait a couple weeks so as to avoid contamination of the experiment, but that side has extreme memory issues (after all, they cant even remember the 30s or 70s happened!) and I am fairly confident we can predict the end results.
(I’m thinking maybe the doorstop one could be along the lines of “Hippie Stoppers” and the girls comment could be something like “No Johnny, you always make my room smell like s***!”)
And CNN says there is NOT 2 sides to some debates! Yes you read correctly. We can only agree on some “science” stuff like global warming.
I’m always gob smacked by these types. Quantum mechanics has been a theory for 70 years and it has NEVER failed a test. Yet despite that there are still lots of questions and objections to it that fuels the ongoing debate.
Compared to QM the theory of CO2 controlling the climate is a dirty snotrag.
I might be offended, but the entire cartoon is such a pathetic attempt at humor that I’m reduced to feeling sorry for the cartoonist’s lack of talent and pity for the NYT’s editorial board’s lack of opinion material. . . . . .