Over the weekend Dr. Roger Pielke Junior let it be known on his Twitter feed that he’s had it up to his “keester” with certain climate activists, especially the ones that are harassing a former associate of his, simply because that person IS a former associate.
It’s pretty ugly and it underscores how climate zealotry has gotten out of control. I myself have been at the receiving end of some of this to the point where I have had to increase security at my home and at my business.
I’ve also had to increase my personal security due to the fact that on occasion, due to the fact that I’m a well known local person and recognizable due to my exposure on radio and television, I am occasionally accosted in public over my stance on climate. But my issues pale in comparison to what Dr. Pielke writes of.
http://twitter.com/RogerPielkeJr/status/483249583699787776
http://twitter.com/RogerPielkeJr/status/483249938235543553
And this is what I consider to be the quote of the week:
http://twitter.com/RogerPielkeJr/status/483252448480751617
When I think of “obsessed and malicious” in the context of “climate scientists”, this image immediately sprang to mind. This was from AGU 2013, where a session about “climate scientists under attack” was mainly just a big whiny gripe about FOIA requests.
The irony of this photo is that one of the people on that panel has been launching lawsuits against climate skeptics, yet I don’t know of a single climate skeptic that has launched a lawsuit against any climate scientist, other than a countersuit to force the issue into court, rather than let it be drug out for years as some sort of slow motion financial punishment.
The other irony was that sitting in the front row listening to how these folks tell their stories of how they have been so “horribly abused” by climate skeptics questioning their science, the “climate antichrist” (me) sat there quietly and listened, not disrupting, being careful not to appear threatening in any way. I asked no questions, and left the meeting quietly.
In addition to the regular attacks that we get daily of climate skeptics just being stupid, paid for shills, etc. we occasionally get wild claims that climate skeptics should be put on trial, imprisoned, or even killed. There is also an undercurrent of climate ugliness that pervades in social media. I’m not talking about the obvious rants such as climate skeptics are shills for “big oil”, I’m talking about when unscrupulous people bring your family into it.
There’s just no excuse for this sort of stuff:
I have blurred out the name which happens to be the name of “Goddard’s” son. I’m not going to add to the damage by allowing the name here.
Thankfully, upon being challenged on this ugliness, Mr. Venema apologized and retracted his Tweet; he says it was a re-tweet, but even if it was, re-tweeting something so obviously ugly and stupid puts his motivation into question.
The whole episode is odd, because on one hand Mr. Venema is preaching for tolerance and restraint, and more civil scientific discourse, and then we have an “off the rails” moment like this coming from him.
We all have our moments where our judgment lapses, but this suggests to me that the inner id of some climate activist folks is saying that they know better than we do how to live our lives and raise our children, which is often more the characteristics of a religion, than a science.
Maybe this inner conflict is why some climate activists play dress up Nazis, though, it isn’t always so ugly, sometimes they dress up as superheroes.
The warm-mongers are losing the war so it will only get uglier from now on.
Was it James Delingpole who said: “For you ze warm is over!”? It was brilliant whoever it was. No – it was one of his commenters – sorry – I can’t remember who.
Jimmy Haigh +1
Would love a Josh cartoon of that. Hint hint.
If the world was warming, everything would be all cozy for the AGWers. Their backs are up against the wall because their theory is not be validated by the climate. Some will act like rats who are cornerd – most won’t because they are not rats.
If you truly believe that the future of humanity is in the balance, that if you fail the world may be destroyed, there is no crime which is beyond contemplation. Any act, no matter how heinous, pales into insignificance compared to the deaths of billions of people.
A crisis is a moral slippery slope.
Modern science is religion. It’s called scientism. Been like that for quite a while now. No bigger mythology than the dispassionate scientist following the evidence wherever it leads. Sorry but there is nothing more trenchant and pigheaded than current scientific orthodoxy. Don’t believe it? Then question it and see what happens. But it looks like you already have. There you go. Human beings defending their turf. That is older than any theory or religion.
The Brown Shirts are egged on by dear leaders too.
If we continue to allow our governments to slop the troughs nothing will change.
It is a social/psychological phenomena reminiscent of religious zealotry. People actually (and strongly) feel their belief system warrants attacking any threat. Sure it’s immoral, but the desperation felt by the perpetrator justifies it in their mind. What I find odd is that such a shaky hypothesis can inspire such devotion.
Jimmy Haigh
Maybe you were thinking of this post from Sean Thomas:
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/
I often think of the saying “Jesus, save me from your followers”. The fact that it is appropriate here shows that this is not a scientific issue. One thing I’ve noticed in life is that those who preach tolerance are the most intolerant of all. Not coincidentally much of the intolerance comes from elitists and leftists and their causes.
Anthony writes: “I myself have been at the receiving end of some of this to the point where I have had to increase security at my home and at my business.”
And for those wondering, that explains why I’m so closed-mouthed about who I am, where I live, etc.
Below is a pithy statement that accurately captures the sad state of “science” and government
“If we continue to allow our governments to slop the troughs nothing will change.”
Outing Goddard’s son is just horrible. This is one of the many reasons that Steven Goddard should have remained Steven Goddard.
A. Watts says they will come after your business. They will come after you personally. They will come after your family. Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. says they will even come after your students and associates.
I can tell you that the man who is moral and ethical will do the right thing even if he could do wrong and get away with it. A moral man will do what is right even when no one is looking. We have very few “scientists” in the climate field who meet that standard in my view and experience.
Hopefully all of this should tell us that when you are wondering if you should blame incompetence or malice for the widespread data mishandling that you should look to malice first every time. The alarmists are not worthy of any respect in any matter. Look at Hansen’s testimony before congress and the cutting off the AC in the summer in D.C. to aid his alarmist BS that started all this. Can anyone call that moral? And now we know that the historical temperature data records are all lies.
And they want to execute us!
Keith says:
June 30, 2014 at 8:22 am
Thanks for reminding us of this piece of genius too:
“Here come de heap big warmy. Bigtime warmy warmy. Is big big hot. Plenty big warm burny hot. Hot! Hot hot! But now not hot. Not hot now. De hot come go, come go. Now Is Coldy Coldy. Is ice. Hot den cold. Frreeeezy ice til hot again. Den de rain. It faaaalllll. Make pasty.”
I definitely remember the: “For you ze warm is over!” comment on James Delingpole . I seem to remember James’ reply was something like: “Damn your eyes! I should have thought of that!”
“we occasionally get wild claims that climate skeptics should be put on trial, imprisoned, or even killed. “… So the term ‘denier’ didn’t have any thing to do with the holocaust? And the hundreds if not thousands of comments were just figments of imaginations? Or that I was just sick, or exhibiting juvenile behavior by rebelling, not accepting authority? Nobody ever said that skeptics should be tried for crimes for the billions of people who will die in the future if they didn’t support the immediate implementation of laws, treaty and cap n trade for the elimination of co2? They never said that? It was just a wild claim? … And they have the nerve to say, I’m delusional? Are these people living in reality? Of course all of that was said. That’s not a wild claim. It was really scary being a skeptic in 2004.
Paul in Sweden says:
June 30, 2014 at 8:10 am
“If we continue to allow our governments to slop the troughs nothing will change.”
Sad – but true. Fortunately, democracy allows us to get rid of bad government. Unfortunately, in the UK at least, the opposition is well in on the scam too. Also unfortunately, in the UK at least, the education system has been dumbed down for a generation and a half and the only thing people care about these days is utter crap like “Britain’s Got Talent” and frickin’ reality TV shows…
Shades of Giordano Bruno.
“Mr. Venema … says it was a re-tweet”
Not it wasn’t. If it was, Twitter would have marked it so and there would be a RT at the start of the tweet. So at best, he copied and pasted it from another tweet which requires actual work to do rather than just click the re-tweet button. This means he did more than just re-tweet something to highlight it.
Goood that you’ve done what I advised you to, be careful.
That’s a key reason I keep my residential address hidden to all but tpeople I trust will keep it confidential. I use a private mailbox for most mail. Government lists such as for voting are a security risk.
Of course in the US you can easily get a concealed-weapong permit.
Listening to this silly argument about climate change by mankind is driving me ratty. The sun’s rays may heat a gas in the atmosphere but that heat will not be transferred into the ocean it will be stopped cold by surface tension. The rejection of heat is total. You can not heat water through its surface therefore there is no such thing as a greenhouse gas and no such thing as AGW Try heating water through its surface using a heat gun no can do. The irony of the situation is that if you want to heat water through the surface, the only way to do it is to float something metal on the surface and then apply the heat because the floating object cancels thesurface tension and the water accepts the heat. The sun’s rays enter the ocean but no additional heat goes in. The whole argument is a nonsense. I’m sure somebody will say that surface tension blocking heat violates the second law of thermodynamics, tough, you can’t heat water through the surface.
A lab coat is the (would-be) emperor’s new clothing.
It is the socialist way.
Keith Sketchley says:
June 30, 2014 at 8:54 am
“Of course in the US you can easily get a concealed-weapong permit.”
Only about half the states make it “easy” to get and use a concealed weapon permit. Only leftwing nutters can easily get carry permits in states like cali and nj or areas like wash, dc
[snip – off topic]