Another green calls for "Deniers" to be jailed

RFK_jail

Climate Depot reports that another prominent green, Robert F. Kennedy Junior, has called for climate “deniers” to be jailed. Is it just me, or is there something very wrong with a political landscape in which people find it acceptable to demand their opponents be jailed for disagreeing with them? Watch the video.

RFK Jr wants to jail energy CEO’s for “Treason” Laments no current laws to punish climate skeptics:

RFK Jnr is not alone in demanding people who disagree with him do time – the Google search http://google.com/search?q=jail+climate+deniers returns over 200,000 hits.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
249 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
September 24, 2014 12:07 am

Control freak cowards of the world, you are not alone.
Unbelievable.

randyjet
Reply to  jdseanjd
September 29, 2014 9:44 pm

The Koch brothers have already committed enough corporate crimes to be in jail if we had a justice system that worked. I am only surprised that they have not gotten more money from the US government.

Reply to  randyjet
September 30, 2014 1:52 am

Sorry, randyjet, I don’t know enough about the Koch bros to comment on them.
I do know enough, however to say that labelling people ‘deniers’ , with the vastly unpleasant connotations to the holocaust that carries, & calling for them to be jailed, is a cry so unjust, anti-democratic & foolish as to be ludicrous.
Fascism here we come.
Here in the UK, our moronic PM, David Cameron, has, in a UN speech, labelled people calling for 9/11 truth as ” Non-Violent Extremists”.
To seek the truth is now an extremist position ?
Fascism has already arrived.
I am flabbergasted where ‘they’ find such idiots to warm the chairs & spout the nonsense of high office.
JD.

Reply to  jdseanjd
October 1, 2014 7:46 am

At least he labels them “non violent”. Which is more than our leader does to anyone who questions him.

Reply to  randyjet
October 1, 2014 7:00 am

Name one.

September 24, 2014 12:12 am

“…contemptible human beings”. Well that’s nice.

Reply to  Peter Ward
September 24, 2014 2:36 am

Perfect projection.

ShrNfr
Reply to  Peter Ward
September 24, 2014 6:46 am

Quite something coming from a family of crooked women exploiting, drug using/dealing, drunks isn’t it??

dry in california
Reply to  Peter Ward
September 24, 2014 9:59 am

He ought to know contemptible human beings since his family are prime examples

Greg Roane
Reply to  Peter Ward
September 24, 2014 11:47 am

Hey, at least we are Human! That is actually a step up, in most cases. LOL

Bill Williams
September 24, 2014 12:22 am

Interesting though that it is a crime to raise a false alarm, such as yelling “fire” in a crowded theater, and causing mass panic.

Cold in Wisconsin
Reply to  Bill Williams
September 24, 2014 4:35 am

Crying “fire” in a crowded theatre was provided as the exception to free speech in a famous US Supreme Court case. So the world is not a crowded theatre, but political decisions have consequences, and when “the jig is up” and the Climate Catastrophe is finally exposed, will the false prophets be held to account? Probably not, as their belief system is like a religion. It will be interesting to note what defenses will be given.

LeeHarvey
Reply to  Cold in Wisconsin
September 24, 2014 5:22 am

I took Bill’s point to be that inciting panic (in this case, over CAGW) is an exception to free speech, but RFK Jr. wants to make the sane counter-argument to a cry of ‘FIRE’ the illegal speech.

SMC
Reply to  Cold in Wisconsin
September 24, 2014 8:32 am

No defense is required. According to the gospel, any change in global climate, hotter or colder, is primarily influenced by the CO2 emitted by man. The CAWG church has covered their bases.

Mike in AZ
Reply to  Cold in Wisconsin
September 24, 2014 7:18 pm

Actually there is a word left out tin that often quoted decision. The decision was that is was illegal to cry “fire” in a crowded theater FALSELY.
No worries though. The Day of Reckoning is coming.

Richard G
Reply to  Cold in Wisconsin
September 25, 2014 2:35 am

The defense of CAGW alarmists will be that it is a religion, not science and only requires faith to believe in, therefore they cannot be persecuted for their religious beliefs.

mrpeteraustin
Reply to  Bill Williams
September 24, 2014 8:34 am

Sigh. The ‘yelling “fire” in a crowded theater’ case was overturned 40 years ago, back when Global Cooling was the big scare. Please stop using it.
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/11/its-time-to-stop-using-the-fire-in-a-crowded-theater-quote/264449/

Reply to  mrpeteraustin
September 25, 2014 6:31 am

Thank you very much for the link and education Mr. Peter Austin.

Steve P
Reply to  Bill Williams
September 24, 2014 8:48 am

Please at least render the argument properly. You omitted the critical word falsely yelling fire in a crowded theater, or any theater, for that matter..
You would just let them all sit there and burn?

Steve P
Reply to  Steve P
September 24, 2014 10:37 am

My mistake. You did say false alarm

jones
September 24, 2014 12:24 am

How about deniers having to wear some kind of identifying label or badge?
Would he agree to that as a measure?
I have the awful suspicion the answer is “yes”……………..
.
P.S. Could “contemptible human beings” be considered sub-human in any sense?
It is on that particular road isn’t it?…A “spectrum” of worthiness conditions as it were…

Jake
Reply to  jones
September 24, 2014 5:39 am

While this comment may be one of my personal favorites, I think we all need to be careful to start in with the Nazi parallels. The warmists have used that tactic for years, and there is no reason for us to go and slither in the gutter with them.

jones
Reply to  Jake
September 24, 2014 8:55 pm

Indeed Jake, I would tend to agree.
However, I am NOT actually saying he IS a Nazi but I don’t see why the question shouldn’t be put in the terms I have to at least get a sense of where his thoughts might lie.
Fair point though Jake.

TRM
Reply to  jones
September 24, 2014 7:05 am

“Sieg Heil Mein Furher” was exactly what I was thinking as well watching that. That whole “freedom of speech” thing is just so 1700s. I guess when they can’t win with facts, reason and logic they get violent.
First they ignore you, then they mock you, then the get violent with you, then you win.
So next step is that they lose and they know it. They are getting increasingly desperate.

Reply to  TRM
September 24, 2014 8:05 am

Except that these people are gradually installing governments that think like they do. And eventually, they will get what they want, before “you win”.

Village Idiot
September 24, 2014 12:27 am

There’s been any number of Villagers, in their comments, requesting the jailing (or worse) of climate scientists. What’s good for the goose is, surely, good for the gander?

Reply to  Village Idiot
September 24, 2014 12:36 am

Ganders are already in jail, peeking on inmates.

Brute
Reply to  Village Idiot
September 24, 2014 12:42 am

Anonymous comments? Is that all you’ve got? Come on, please do better.

Jim South London
Reply to  Brute
September 24, 2014 1:25 am

Me do better. Just let Wasted RFK junior do it all for me.

DirkH
Reply to  Village Idiot
September 24, 2014 12:55 am

Village Idiot
September 24, 2014 at 12:27 am
“There’s been any number of Villagers, in their comments, requesting the jailing (or worse) of climate scientists”
I don’t belive you. You’re a liar.

Village Idiot
Reply to  DirkH
September 24, 2014 5:02 am

A small and varied selection:
Ally E: Sooner or later Mann is going to go too far and find himself embroiled in a case he cannot back out of. As for him stalling other cases, I want to see him facing prison for contempt of Court
Blade: In my opinion every single person you listed there (plus a lot more) should be waterboarded, tried, convicted and sentenced to hard labor for attempting to and sometimes successfully defrauding the taxpayers
Tom J: Anyway, threaten all those who are depressed about global warming that their depression will have to be treated with Citalopram. Voila, the CAGW nonsense will cease to exist [Read comment to understand context]
richardscourtney: I have repeatedly pointed out that this global warming propaganda aimed at children is child abuse
DirkH: As AGW believers are the governments, they don’t need to be terrorists. They can use the taxpayer money they steal to fund terrorism if need be; in all other cases they can use police force and regular military to force the population to worship them

Reply to  DirkH
September 24, 2014 6:33 am

I don’t feel Alarmists should go to jail for holding their views.
However there are examples where they should perhaps face specific charges. For example, some of the temperature “adjustments” seem like “falsifying the public record,” and, “misuse of public funds.” If it could be proven that this was done for pay, under the orders of a politician, further charges might be brought.
The charges would have to be specific, and the charged person would have their day in court, and allowed all the benefits of due process of law.
Never would it be a case of jailing a person for having an opinion.

John Endicott
Reply to  DirkH
September 24, 2014 7:45 am

Village Idiot,
Well you certainly live up to your name if you can’t see the difference between calling for people who commit actual prosecutable offenses (fraud, abuse of the court system, etc) face the consequences of their actions vs calling for people to go to jail simply for the crime of having a contray opinion

Reply to  DirkH
September 26, 2014 3:18 am

DirkH
In support of your untrue assertion that

“There’s been any number of Villagers, in their comments, requesting the jailing (or worse) of climate scientists”

you say

richardscourtney: “I have repeatedly pointed out that this global warming propaganda aimed at children is child abuse”

Yes, I have repeatedly pointed out that it is child abuse to tell children that their pets will be drowned, their homes destroyed and they will be separated from their parents and, therefore, it is child abuse to show children the adverts and films which say that.
My statement is a clear and unambiguous assertion that such evil adverts and films should not be directed at children.
My clear and unambiguous statement is not – and is nothing like – “requesting the jailing (or worse) of climate scientists”.

If somebody objected to a pornographic advert for baked beans then that would not be a request for the jailing (or worse) of people who grow beans.
Richard

Reply to  DirkH
September 26, 2014 3:20 am

DirkH
SINCERE APOLOGIES.
My post should have been addressed to ‘Village Idiot’ and not you.
Please accept my humble apology for the error and for the insult.
Richard

Admin
Reply to  Village Idiot
September 24, 2014 1:01 am

Climategate contains evidence of possible criminal acts – Phil Jones escaped prosecution, according to the UK Information Commissioner, because a ridiculously short statute of limitations for the law he is alleged to have broken.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_Unit_documents
“The Information Commissioner’s Office stated that “the prima facie evidence from the published e-mails indicate an attempt to defeat disclosure by deleting information. It is hard to imagine more cogent prima facie evidence. … The fact that the elements of a [FOIA] section 77 offence may have been found here, but cannot be acted on because of the elapsed time, is a very serious matter.””

Lance of BC
Reply to  Village Idiot
September 24, 2014 1:26 am

Hey IDIOT, these comments(and worse) started with climate/alarmist/polys for years , I’ve been told I should be killed just for posting data on blogs years ago, so go [snip] your gander.

garymount
Reply to  Lance of BC
September 24, 2014 4:23 am

My local paper thought it would be funny if I got killed. I no longer even look at my local papers that arrive at my door. They have ostracized me.comment image

Reply to  Village Idiot
September 24, 2014 3:04 am

Village Idiot:
“Any number” of comments??
Add me to the list of those who think you are a liar. I’ll retract and apologize — if you can post credible examples, comparable to the despicable R.F. Kennedy’s comment.

Brute
Reply to  dbstealey
September 24, 2014 9:04 pm

He can’t or he would have. The fact is that questionable anonymous comments (if they exist at all) could have been planted by the village idiot himself.

CodeTech
Reply to  Village Idiot
September 24, 2014 4:01 am

I would like to see people who have misused public funds and lied, and falsified/altered data, and created an exaggerated warming where there is none be forced to pay back the public funds they used, or do jail time as an alternative. I believe that people who have broken laws and lied should be in jail.
In contrast, these nutcases believe that people they DISAGREE WITH should be in jail.
In the same way, I believe in all of the free-speech possible. It outs nut-jobs, because they never know when to stop talking. These nutcases would block my ability to speak.
It’s bizarre that any thinking non-trolling human would think otherwise.

David A
Reply to  CodeTech
September 24, 2014 5:05 am

plus one
DB, this is the criteria. A call to prosecute those who knowingly withheld data, or presented knowingly false data, and in affect caused public policy demanding monetary assets from innocent citizens, is radically different then calling for someone to be jailed just because they disagreed. (So please do not apologize if the only examples found are calls to prosecute fraudulent behavior.)

Reply to  CodeTech
September 24, 2014 6:36 am

You said it very well. There is a distinction that must be made between jailing someone for having an opinion, and jailing someone for specific deeds, (such as falsifying data or misusing funds.)

Dave
Reply to  CodeTech
September 24, 2014 7:24 am

you are right

hunter
Reply to  Village Idiot
September 24, 2014 5:14 am

Village Idiot represents the idiot faction quite well.

JohnWho
Reply to  hunter
September 24, 2014 7:03 am

Doesn’t represent the village so well though.

Hawkward
Reply to  Village Idiot
September 24, 2014 6:12 am

Wait, so you’re comparing postings on a message board to something said in a news interview by someone who not only is a leader in the “green movement”, but is a member of a very prominent political family? Uh, okay.

beng
Reply to  Village Idiot
September 24, 2014 7:40 am

No, they should be tried for fraud, racketeering and taxpayer-money laundering. Let the juries decide the punishment.

BFL
Reply to  Village Idiot
September 24, 2014 8:54 am

Yes, here is one: http://www.weather.com/news/science/environment/epa-climate-policy-expert-sentenced-32-months-fraud-20131219
The EPA’s highest-paid employee and a leading expert on climate change was sentenced to 32 months in federal prison Wednesday for lying to his bosses and saying he was a CIA spy working in Pakistan so he could avoid doing his real job.
Beale pled guilty in September to bilking the government out of nearly $1 million in salary and other benefits over a decade. He perpetrated his fraud largely by failing to show up at the EPA for months at a time, including one 18-month stretch starting in June 2011 when he did “absolutely no work,” as his lawyer acknowledged in a sentencing memo filed last week.
When Huvelle asked Beale what he was doing when he claimed he was working for the CIA, he said, “I spent time exercising. I spent a lot of time working on my house.”
He also said he used the time “trying to find ways to fine tune the capitalist system” to discourage companies from damaging the environment. “I spent a lot of time reading on that,” said Beale.
Prosecutor Jim Smith said Beale’s crimes made him a “poster child for what is wrong with government.”
——————————————————————————————————————–
Then there is this: http://johnosullivan.wordpress.com/2012/06/14/un-climate-scientists-plead-for-immunity-from-criminal-prosecution/
Climate researchers working for the United Nations have issued an astonishing plea for immunity from prosecution. Government-funded personnel sought the ruling on the eve of the latest round of international climate talks scheduled for Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (June 20, 2012).
The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) issued it’s formal request for immunity from prosecution to “protect” researchers who have provided “evidence” supportive of the man-made global warming scare story. The perplexing plea will likely reverberate throughout the general scientific community as further affirmation that many climate scientists were not conducting honest research after all.

Anyone got the latest Iphone 6 .
September 24, 2014 12:29 am

Well i think anybody who refuses to give up their latest Iphones and cars
to save the planet should also be jailed for crimes against the planet

and their Saudi owned private luxury super yachts to take down to Rio to watch the World Cup.

William Astley
Reply to  dbstealey
September 24, 2014 11:29 am

Leo DiCaprio seems to be the poster boy for conspicuous in your face consumption. There is no issue with global warming, there is an issue with over consumption of the world’s resources. How much is Leo’s fair share?
Curious that DiCaprio is a spokesperson for the AGW movement. Well may be not, Al Gore is another spokesperson.

Leo’s burgeoning property empire: DiCaprio has spent $23 MILLION on three properties since February including Manhattan apartment with vitamin C showers and a ‘wellness concierge’
Leo DiCaprio has invested more than $23 million in properties since February
His latest purchase is a $10 million apartment at the health-centric Delos building in New York’s Greenwich Village
It boasts posture-supportive heat reflexology flooring and ‘dawn simulation’ provided by a circadian lighting design
In March the actor spent $8 million to purchase a two-bedroom apartment adjacent to his existing $4 million home in Battery Park City
The actor is reportedly currently living in the $8 million unit with his 21-year-old model girlfriend Toni Garrn
In February he spent $5.2 million on a six-bedroom mansion in Palm Springs, California

https://www.google.ca/search?q=leonardo+dicaprio%27s+house&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&channel=sb&biw=1920&bih=903&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=rwojVOKfD67wigKn9oCgBg&ved=0CBwQsAQ

DirkH
Reply to  dbstealey
September 24, 2014 12:34 pm

William Astley
September 24, 2014 at 11:29 am
“Curious that DiCaprio is a spokesperson for the AGW movement. ”
Thanks for the details. Looks like he’s as money savvy as MC Hammer. We need guys like him to work for the climate confessors. It undermines their cause better than any climate model failure.

William Astley
Reply to  dbstealey
September 24, 2014 2:19 pm

Leo Dicaprio is the UN Messenger of Peace for climate change issues. Hypocrite or not, that is the question? The UN and the EU sounds like a great private club. How does one join?
http://dailycaller.com/2014/09/21/leonardo-dicaprio-pauses-private-jets-yachting-with-oil-rich-sheikhs-to-join-peoples-climate-march/

At the very beginning of this summer, in mid-June, DiCaprio jetted into Brazil on a private plane to take in the opening match of the 2014 World Cup.
While in Brazil, the 39-year-old plump playboy stayed on a 470-foot yacht owned by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan of Abu Dhabi, according to Arab News. The glitzy yacht, called the Topaz, is the fifth-biggest yacht on earth. The fancypants vessel boasts a gym, a movie theater, two helipads and three swimming pools.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/16/leonardo-dicaprio-messenger-peace_n_5830564.html

… Leonardo DiCaprio Named UN Messenger Of Peace Ahead Of Climate Summit
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon announced on Tuesday that the 39-year-old American actor will join 11 other prominent world figures who advocate on behalf of the U.N. as Messengers of Peace including Stevie Wonder, Michael Douglas, George Clooney, Brazilian author Paulo Coelho, primatologist Jane Goodall and conductor Daniel Barenboim.
Ban told a news conference that the Dicaprio “is not just one of the world’s leading actors” but he has “a longstanding commitment to environmental causes.”
He said DiCaprio will focus his U.N. role on climate change issues.
“His global stardom is the perfect match for this global challenge,” the secretary-general told a news conference.

http://www.forbes.com/pictures/mhj45ieme/leonardo-dicaprio-2/

Leonardo DiCaprio
The actor owns properties on both coasts. His Tinseltown compound lies in the Hollywood Hills, comprised of two adjoining land parcels (one purchased from Madonna ) and touting a massive basketball court the movie star built. He also owns two Malibu beachfront homes, including a seven-bedroom Malibu Colony home asking $75,000 per month in rent. In New York City, DiCaprio inhabits a apartment in eco-chic Riverhouse, a Battery Park City condo that pumps out twice-filtered air and filtered water to residents, who include Tyra Banks.

Reply to  dbstealey
September 24, 2014 2:35 pm

Di Caprio is only one hypocrite. He was preceded in Copenhagen during COP-15 by another hypocrite, Brad Pitt:
http://www.stephentaylor.ca/images/brad-pitt-copenhagen2.jpg

Reply to  dbstealey
September 24, 2014 7:00 pm

Who ever really owns it, impressive, ten marine diesel engines, count them stacks! It also has knobs!
“A capital ship for an ocean trip. Was The Walloping Window Blind; No gale that blew dismayed her crew. Or troubled the captain’s mind…”
W^3

Dave
Reply to  Anyone got the latest Iphone 6 .
September 24, 2014 7:34 am

yes, the challenge to them is to turn off the electricity completely, after all, 90% of the world’s electricity is produced by coal fired power plants. ergo, turn off your electricity and the bad coal fired power plants will shut down. just a theory. but lets see if the super rich will turn off the power, or that just the responsibility of us little people??????

Jack
September 24, 2014 12:30 am

One of the benefits of freedom of speech is that cranks like this easily identify themselves. Clearly he is a very shallow reader and just accepts any bs pushed at him. Well the world moved past people like him thousands of years ago. I can imagine him saying fire is too dangerous. People who advocate fire should be kept in a cave. Nothing wrong with raw dinosaur meat and raw seeds.
He does not seem to grasp that the world advances by asking questions not by blocking them.
That is the fatal flaw in warmist post modern science. They thought they could impose silence and avoid questions on their manipulated data.

Andrew N
September 24, 2014 12:30 am

What is actually happening is we are denying him his right to a green lifestyle paid for by others. Never trust a cornered rent-seeker.

September 24, 2014 12:30 am

What do you expect from a scion of a criminal clan?

Reply to  Alexander Feht
September 24, 2014 8:11 am

From a successful criminal clan? A little more intelligence.

dp
September 24, 2014 12:34 am
David Ball
Reply to  dp
September 24, 2014 6:34 am

Read further upthread.

dp
Reply to  David Ball
September 24, 2014 9:31 am

I never read comments before responding to the article as I don’t wish to be influenced by what I read. I certainly don’t wish to be censured by peer pressure before I’ve even written my response. Otherwise I’m not expressing myself but expressing others through myself. What is the point of that?

cnxtim
September 24, 2014 12:37 am

Is this Camelot Clansman still in the party called “democratic” ? If so, strongly suggest he Googles up the meaning of the word…

Reply to  cnxtim
September 24, 2014 7:16 am

It is not called the “democratic” party. It is called the “democrat” party.
It rhymes with “rat.”

Reply to  Caleb
September 24, 2014 7:54 am

and scat.

dp
Reply to  Caleb
September 24, 2014 9:15 pm

And twastard. Just not very well.

Malcolm
September 24, 2014 12:41 am

The guy doesn’t look very well at all.

mikewaite
September 24, 2014 12:47 am

You have to feel sorry for him . He will never be the man his father was and he has to live with that fact all his days . His father’s assassination permanently disabled him mentally. There is a thoughtful essay in National Review on his comments that is both condemning , but also fairly sympathetic to RFK’s mental state.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/388595/robert-kennedy-jr-aspiring-tyrant-charles-c-w-cooke

Reply to  mikewaite
September 24, 2014 1:31 am

mikewaite
I suspect you may be right when you say

You have to feel sorry for him . He will never be the man his father was and he has to live with that fact all his days . His father’s assassination permanently disabled him mentally.

However, compassion for him does not include ignoring or accepting his words.
His words are likely to be noticed and unthinkingly agreed by some because his family and fortune convey respectability to him.
But his words are vile. They are an attack on the human Spirit. People and peoples develop, advance, and correct their errors by considering the views of others. Often the consideration confirms existing opinion, but sometimes it indicates need for adjustment of existing opinion. Refusal to allow consideration of other views prevents improvement of existing views and, thus, it solidifies things being ‘as they are’.
Stultifying change and development may be desirable for those such as Robert F. Kennedy Junior who are ‘born with a silver spoon in the mouth’. All others have reason to oppose it.
Richard

Jim South London
Reply to  mikewaite
September 24, 2014 1:50 am

Someone haunted by past family tragedy and past drug abuse that excuses the attitudes of an arrogant green bandwagon jumping pathetic whinging egotist who cant live up to the long gone stellar reputation of his family dynasty.

kenw
Reply to  Jim South London
September 24, 2014 6:39 am

Privilege and arrogance are in the genes, it started with his grampa who used his gov’t position to smuggle rum during the prohibition, then used that wealth to buy his 2nd favorite son the presidency, using his dead oldest & favorite son as a sympathy vehicle. Had JFK not been shot he would have gone down as one of the worst presidents in history all the while making Clinton look like a saint morally. But Oswald secured the sympathy factor for perpetuity. Poor RFK (Sr) was just an also ran in a genetic cesspool, no real talent nor malice, just lukewarm nothingness carrying a mantle that he didn’t understand. Some say RFK Sr was more sensitive and at times embarassed by his family’s legacy of crass corruption and moral hypocrisy.

dp
Reply to  mikewaite
September 24, 2014 9:29 pm

Brilliant.

dp
Reply to  dp
September 24, 2014 9:37 pm

Ooopsy – that was to be a reply to mikewaite

mpainter
September 24, 2014 12:48 am

I expect it to get worse. As the so-called pause continues and frustration mounts, you will see more and more of this sort of stuff.

latecommer2014
Reply to  mpainter
September 24, 2014 5:26 am

Peter I will give you the respect of believing that you speak truthfully for yourself, but I don’t believe your option of the run of alarmists is correct. Most “scientists” on your side have too much at stake personally to change. They do not show a hint of proper scientific attitude where being proven wrong is a victory for science.
Now a couple of questions.
Where in the observational record have you ever found proof that co2 rises before temperature in the atmosphere?
Where is your proof that 2 degrees of warming is detrimental to anyone or thing?
I would also like your opinion on my belief that “your side” uses outright lies and fabricates evidence in the name of the greater cause. Do you consider this practice science?

Man Bearpig
September 24, 2014 1:01 am

He wishes there were a law to lock up innocent people ? This guy is dangerous.

Reply to  Man Bearpig
September 24, 2014 2:27 am

It’s called the Drug War, and happens all the time. Even growing plants is now illegal.

RockyRoad
Reply to  NikFromNYC
September 24, 2014 10:42 pm

My cousin’s son is addicted to marijuana. I’ve seen it destroy his life. I wouldn’t say such drug use is “innocent”.

Reply to  Man Bearpig
September 24, 2014 3:41 am

This guy is dangerous.
That kind of thinking is dangerous. What we often see here is the evil side of human nature.
Machiavelli wrote, “Men are bad unless compelled to be good.” The Enlightenment was an attempt to overcome this sort of evil thinking. It only partially succeeded. Now, things are going the wrong way again.
Is there really any fundamental difference between R.F. Kennedy and the ISIS savages, brutally murdering people by the hundreds at a time simply for the ‘crime’ of being drafted into the army? Sawing off heads just because they can sets an excellent example for everyone. It would probably work with deniers, too.
Kennedy isn’t really much different. You can tell he’s filled with rage. If he could get away with it, I have little doubt that he would saw off a few heads himself, to set an example. To save the planet, of course. What are a few heads by comparison to that great good?

RockyRoad
Reply to  dbstealey
September 24, 2014 10:44 pm

One could easily argue that the CAGW movement has already killed far more people than ISIS could ever hope to kill.
And they did it innocuously and without knives.

Captain CO2 Di Caprio
September 24, 2014 1:03 am

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_F._Kennedy,_Jr.
Using drug and probably alcohol abuse to excuse the attitudes of an arrogant pathetic whinging egotist.

DirkH
September 24, 2014 1:03 am

Terry Gilliam wants capitalists to be shot (*); so RFK is relatively sane on a scale of genocidal ambitions. He only wants to jail skeptics to exploit them in the US prison-industrial complex. As opposed to Stalin’s Gulag, you are not worked to death there within three years. So that’s some progress amongst the progressives.
(*) http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2014/09/22/Filmmaker-Terry-Gilliam-Short-Sighted-Capitalists-Should-Be-Shot

September 24, 2014 1:11 am

The precedent was set with Prohibition. “We don’t like your choice of intoxicants and if you continue we will jail you.” Intoxicant prohibition is a declining force. Other ideas for the use of all those SWAT teams will arise.

Reply to  M Simon
September 24, 2014 2:28 am

You beat me to it. I just said the same thing above.

Reply to  M Simon
September 24, 2014 7:12 am

The sad thing about Prohibition is that it made respect for the Law shrink.
The Law, if written by the people for the people, should be honored even if you disagree. You can change the Law in the USA by democratic processes.
It is interesting to note that the Kennedy fortune was founded, to some degree, on bootlegging. When the roots feed from a soil of disrespect for the law, it is hard to grow branches and fruit that respect the law, unless it is a far less civilized law-of-the-jungle.
There is even some evidence that John Kennedy’s election as president was based on voter fraud in Chicago. The law of one-vote-for-one-man was not respected. Democrats were not democratic.
The law as written by our founding fathers is beautiful and worthy of respect. Those that mock it have never come up with a better system, and usually create a system that, one way or another, leads to ruin for themselves, and also their children and grandchildren.
I hope the Kennedy’s keep this all in the family, and don’t drag down others as they reap what they have sown.

Jim South London
September 24, 2014 1:21 am

Sorry Peter but you cheered zealous idiots like him and Al Gore on in the first place.Are you the Hugh Hefner complaining about Climate Porn being too explicit.
Want to jump off the overloaded AGW band wagon before the wheels fall off.

kenw
Reply to  Jim South London
September 24, 2014 6:24 am

You learned about JFK, Jr from Wikipedia? Well, I hope you don’t do your legal research there….

RockyRoad
Reply to  Jim South London
September 24, 2014 9:56 pm

Yes, Peter…. JFK Jr. deserved no cheering, especially at his FUNERAL
LOL!

Dominic A
September 24, 2014 1:26 am

when you jail someone for what they think or what they believe it’s called Fascism.

September 24, 2014 1:32 am

Well, they imprisoned Galileo for claiming the earth went round the sun not vice-versa as was the then current belief. So what’s different now, lets imprison all those who have the audacity to challenge the current belief. A good historical precedent!

Owen in GA
Reply to  English Pensioner
September 24, 2014 4:23 am

They jailed Galileo for mocking the pope. The science stuff was just an excuse.

Dudley Horscroft
Reply to  Owen in GA
September 24, 2014 4:35 am

Actually he wasn’t mocking the Pope – it is just that the Pope thought he was – which is even worse!

RockyRoad
Reply to  Owen in GA
September 24, 2014 10:46 pm

It wasn’t mocking. He just said the Pope was wrong.

William Astley
September 24, 2014 1:34 am

Extreme environmental groups are using AGW and their belief in the green energy fairy tale to push policies that will lead to the economic collapse of the developed countries if our politicians do not stop this anti CO2, green scam, anti industrial development madness. Extreme environmentalists do not understand what the problems are and most certainly do not understand how to solve the problems.
Ironically if CO2 emissions and AGW were a real problem which they are not, nuclear power would be the solution. Regardless, nuclear power is the long term energy solution and money spent on optimizing the US fourth generation reactor design will smooth the eventually transition and will create real jobs, rather than dot.com jobs that disappear when the money feeding the madness runs out (see US conversion of corn to ethanol for a great example of green madness)
Green energy is a scam. It does not work from an economic or an engineering standpoint. We have wasted trillions of dollars on green scams which have resulted in almost no significant reduction in CO2 emissions. Jim Hansen quote:

Suggesting that renewables will let us phase rapidly off fossil fuels in the United States, China, India, or the world as a whole is almost the equivalent of believing in the Easter Bunny and [the] Tooth Fairy.

P.S. CO2 emissions are not an environmental or a climate problem. There is however real need for viable, safe long term, energy source.
Intermittent and in the case of wind random energy sources cannot substantially reduce CO2 emission. To significantly reduce CO2 emissions, intermittent energy sources require energy storage which increases the cost of the system by more than a factor of 10 if there was a energy storage system that could store sufficient energy which there is not. Engineering problems (see bearing problems in large wind turbines for a good example of an engineering problem that is not going away) do not disappear because you ignore them. There are no magic wands that to solve engineering problems. Throwing more money at the green scam will not change them into viable solutions. Sometimes there are unsolvable, limiting engineering problems.
The US tested a fourth generation nuclear reactor design in 1988. The fourth generation reactor design is fail safe and will shut down on loss of cooling power. The prototype design tests were successful. Power was shut off to the reactor cooling system, the prototype reactor shutdown in a controlled manner, as it is fail safe. The fourth generation design used liquid sodium for cooling and is hence not pressurized.
The US fourth generation nuclear reactor design will roughly a 1000 times more energy per pound of uranium as it it can fission U238 in addition to U235 (and almost all other fissionable materials) and produces roughly a 100 times less radioactive waste as it fissions all most all fissionable material in the reactor.
There is sufficient fissionable material readily available to power all countries on the earth for roughly a billion years, using fourth generation nuclear reactors.
http://pandoraspromise.com/
Break Through: From the Death of Environmentalism to the Politics of Possibility

David in Michigan
Reply to  William Astley
September 24, 2014 5:25 am

“Ironically if CO2 emissions and AGW were a real problem which they are not, nuclear power would be the solution.”
So true, so true. And this is the root cause of my skepticism. If you accept AGW is a problem, why would you reject the quickest and surest solution?

PiperPaul
Reply to  David in Michigan
September 24, 2014 6:21 am

Perhaps a solution is not the goal.

LeeHarvey
Reply to  David in Michigan
September 24, 2014 6:34 am

Because you’re an acolyte of Paul Ehrlich?
“Giving society cheap, abundant energy … would be the equivalent of giving an idiot child a machine gun. – Paul Ehrlich”

Pamela Gray
September 24, 2014 1:39 am

This man’s emotional ability to unbiasly examine evidence was cruelly removed from his persona, not once but three time, by those who wished to stifle free speech and the exchange of sometimes radical ideas. While I look upon Camelot with a “say what?” attitude, the man must be allowed to present his opinions at will in a free nation. Let him speak his mind. It doesn’t bother me at all that he wishes I were cooling my redheaded (now admittedly from a cover-the-gray-box-of-dye) unruly Irish locks in jail. And this from a long time fascination with the Kennedy (green clover Irish) and Bouvier (Royal Dutch and proud of it) family dynasty. A biography of the Bouvier family was my first biography read as a Jr High student in Lostine, Oregon. I’m Catholic, it was required reading.
And for those of you desperate for minutia, the second biography I read was about Tom McCall, titled “Ranch Under the Rimrock”. As it turns out, life is for me, stranger than fiction.

alacran
September 24, 2014 1:46 am

Unbelievabel! What an Eco-Fascist ! Oh Lord, please help him,let raining brain!

Roy
September 24, 2014 1:55 am

Any Greens in favour of free speech?

CodeTech
Reply to  Roy
September 24, 2014 2:54 am

Absolutely. Greens are completely in favor of free speech for Greens. Everyone else should be in jail.

September 24, 2014 1:57 am

He ( & those of similar “opinions”) must be feeling very insecure in their beliefs to come out with these comments.

Peter Miller
September 24, 2014 2:05 am

Just been reading this guy’s biography on Wikipedia.
In the great scheme of things, he would probably be classified as a C3 type of human being. Born with a silver spoon in his mouth, behaves like a spoiled brat, has the morality of a rodent and can therefore be safely classified as someone whose opinion is utterly valueless.
I am pleased he supports the alarmist cult, I would not like to have him on our side.

Death to Green Fascists
Reply to  Peter Miller
September 24, 2014 4:04 am

[Snip. Please use a legitimate email address. ~ mod.]

mpainter
Reply to  Death to Green Fascists
September 24, 2014 5:59 am

Moderator, please note this bloggers cognomen. You may delete this also.

Boulder Skeptic
Reply to  Death to Green Fascists
September 24, 2014 6:29 pm

Death to…,
I’m a skeptic and probably on “your side” on many parts of this issue. But regarding your screen name…really? Not much different than what alarmists are saying is it? The mindset you have reflected in this screen name is not helping, in my opinion. Consider modifying it.
Thanks,
Bruce

latecommer2014
Reply to  Peter Miller
September 24, 2014 5:47 am

Amen brother

Mike McMillan
September 24, 2014 2:08 am

He always gotten a lot of mileage from someone else’s name.

Jimbo
September 24, 2014 2:12 am

“I think it’s treason. Do I think the Koch brothers are treasonous — yes, I do,” Kennedy told Climate Depot.

Koch has done more for the United States of America (and the world) than Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. People like this should be very careful as to how history might view them. What if we entered another Little Ice Age? Has he bothered to look at the IPCC’s projections graphs and compared them to observations?

Robert Francis Kennedy Jr.—the son of former New York senator and U.S. attorney general Robert F. Kennedy—is an attorney, environmental activist and syndicated talk radio host.”
http://www.biography.com/people/robert-f-kennedy-jr–20832775
============
Koch Industries conglomerate involved in a variety of industries such as refining and chemicals; service process & pollution control equipment; minerals; fertilizers; fibers and polymers; commodity and financial trading; forest and consumer products; ranching; and business development. In December 2013, the company acquired Molex International, an electronics components company. Significant divisions included Georgia-Pacific, which makes and sells tissue, packaging, paper, building products and pulp, and Flint Hills Resources, which operates refineries in Alaska, Minnesota and Texas. The company employs 60,000 people worldwide.”
http://www.forbes.com/companies/koch-industries/

mpainter
September 24, 2014 2:13 am

Yes, it appears that Peter let slip a telling comment- it is the “cause” that is paramount and their science is the means to its realization.
Peter, you hardly speak like an attorney.

mike
September 24, 2014 2:14 am

Is it just my opinion or is that AGW scam becoming more and more like the nationalsozialism of the 1930s?
Because the only thing of which the AGW propaganda is different to nationalsozialism is that “scepicism” is still allowed.

hunter
Reply to  mike
September 24, 2014 5:20 am

Your opinion is certainly reasonable when one considers history.

DirkH
Reply to  mike
September 24, 2014 12:21 pm

Propaganda is an American invention; Goebbels’ favorite book was the 1928 book Propaganda by Edward Bernays.
Bernays in turn was advisor of Woodrow Wilson during WW I and shaped Wilson’s reputation as the bringer of democracy in the run up to the Treaty Of Versailles.
He also turned women into smokers. Which was his first big success.

Steve P
Reply to  DirkH
September 24, 2014 9:21 pm

I’m not so sure that propaganda is an American invention. Rather, I think it is just the Yankee version or interpretation of an ancient art. Surely you don’t think Americans were the first to tell lies to befuddle the masses, promote their geopolitical agenda, eliminate rivals, or stir up trouble between potential foes?
Consider Freud’s comment to Jung upon their arrival in the US for a series of lectures in 1909:

They don’t realize that we are bringing them the plague.

It is likely that Bernays was coached by his uncle, Sigmund Freud.

dp
Reply to  DirkH
September 25, 2014 4:48 pm

The word predates the United States. It even predates Columbus.

H.R.
September 24, 2014 2:19 am

Gilt guilt on display. Just don’t take it out on me.

Claudius
September 24, 2014 2:28 am

Typical, promotes inclusion and diversity and tolerance to the extreme. Alter the topic of conversation just slightly, instant psychopath.

James (Aus.)
September 24, 2014 2:46 am

Kennedy; you can take the boy out of the bog, but you can’t take..etc.
What an appallingly ignorant and evasive piece of bad form. Where the far right of National Socialism meets the far left of International Socialism is where this addled clown lives.
Apart from the stupidity of his assertions, his personal manner is straight from Slobsville; you could almost feel the disdain and revulsion Michelle had for him.

ConfusedPhoton
September 24, 2014 2:47 am

The problem with Robert F. Kennedy is that he is a nobody within the famous Kennedy dynasty. Joe Kennedy senior, Rose Fitzgerald, JFK and Bobby Kennedy all made their mark in the US and the world. These people were all well known throughout the world, but who can name any of the later Kennedy’s (perhaps Teddy for the wrong reasons).
Clearly this man is trying to make up for his own inadequacies.

CodeTech
Reply to  ConfusedPhoton
September 24, 2014 2:58 am

CP, although you are right, of course, I have never seen any reason to believe that rfk jr. is capable of ever, EVER realizing that he has inadequacies.

ConfusedPhoton
Reply to  CodeTech
September 24, 2014 3:30 am

Point taken!

LeeHarvey
Reply to  ConfusedPhoton
September 24, 2014 6:38 am

Joe Kennedy made his mark on the world?
Was that before or after profiteering in the ilicit alcohol trade during Prohibition?

Tucci78
September 24, 2014 2:56 am

And yet when I suggest that there is justification for investigating the various catastrophist charalatans of the so-called “consensus in climate science” on the grounds that they have knowingly uttered falsehoods in their applications for research grant funding – in other words, that they have arguably perpetrated criminal theft of value by way of fraud – the various fellahin of the Church of Global Warming sputter and fume about how outlandish such a reasonable suspicion (especially in light of the collusive communications among these quacks revealed by way of Climategate and other FOIA information gains) is somehow supposed to be.

CodeTech
Reply to  Tucci78
September 24, 2014 3:53 am

I suspect this is sorta like “But you found out through Stolen Emails”… as if there is some sort of rule about “illegally obtained evidence” when it comes to reality (ie, NOT the reality that lawyers live in). We are not allowed to know about Climategate. That is forbidden knowledge. Therefore the revelations obtained via Climategate did not, in fact, happen.

Lil Fella from OZ
September 24, 2014 3:00 am

Haven’t they heard of free speech in democracy. Obvious they belong in another country where they would be the ones jailed..

Brock Way
September 24, 2014 3:09 am

Climastrology-cum-McCarthyism

James Allison
September 24, 2014 3:10 am

There is more chance that my Aunties name is Bob than you being an attorney. Take your lies somewhere else.

latecommer2014
Reply to  James Allison
September 24, 2014 5:36 am

By saying “your cause” you are removing yourself from the scientific debate. Causes are not part of science, but are part of politics. Please confine ” Causes” to your political blogs, they are not wanted here

latecommer2014
Reply to  James Allison
September 24, 2014 6:04 am

Obviously Peter you are not involved in science. If you were you would know that “causes” are not part of science. I once spent more than a year trying to prove a hypothesis of my own and was greatly successful. I proved my hypothesis had no basis in fact. I was very happy. That’s the way science works to eliminate false ideas.
No/sarc

latecommer2014
Reply to  James Allison
September 24, 2014 6:13 am

By the wayPeter, I truly wish you were right since I would love a warmer world such as the Roman period. I do not care for cold. Unfortunately your warming exists only in models, observation of natural processes has shown the failure (to date) of your cause. Are you going to hold on to the failure for some reason non scientific?

David Ball
Reply to  James Allison
September 24, 2014 6:29 am

Peter should watch “Inconvenient Truth”. It turned many people I know into skeptics.

D.J. Hawkins
Reply to  James Allison
September 24, 2014 2:18 pm

John Kennedy Jr has been mouldering in his grave since 1999. His cousin, Robert Kennedy Jr is the enviro-wack job attorney.

jbkburack
September 24, 2014 3:27 am

We are witnessing here the decline and fall of a great American family dynasty. None too sane to start with, it has now descended into the long night of total lunacy.

Death to Green Fascists
Reply to  jbkburack
September 24, 2014 4:18 am

[Snip. Please use a legitimate email address. ~ mod.]

mpainter
Reply to  Death to Green Fascists
September 24, 2014 6:02 am

Moderator here is another. Please act.

Tucci78
Reply to  mpainter
September 24, 2014 9:02 am

At 4:18 AM on 24 September, Death to Green Fascists had cleverly quoted:

PJ O’Rourke put it best years ago, speaking of the dead Kennedys: “Two were shot, but under the most romantic circumstances, and not, as might have been hoped, after due process of law.”

…against which mpainter at 6:02 AM had inveighed:

Moderator here is another. Please act.

…apparently referring to mpainter’s earlier (5:59 AM) condemnation of this same poster:

Moderator, please note this bloggers cognomen. You may delete this also.

In support of anyone bright enough to pull up an applicable P.J. O’Rourke quotation on the subject of Clan Kennedy and its overall malevolent presence in American politics down through the decades, permit me to recommend to the moderator that Death to Green Fascists‘ ekename, while colorful and replete with warm sentiments, is not in itself a breach of the public peace (so to speak), and can hardly be looked upon as a violation of the site’s terms of service.
For does not death come to each man, and to every group of men, decent, honest, rights-respecting people and Cargo Cult Science watermelon sociopathic “Liberal” fascists alike?

The collegiate idealists who fill the ranks of the environmental movement seem willing to do absolutely anything to save the biosphere, except take science courses and learn something about it.
— P.J. O’Rourke, Parliament of Whores (1991)

kenw
Reply to  Death to Green Fascists
September 24, 2014 6:44 am

exactly. Being shot was being kind to them and secured the sympathy factor. Too kind as the public never got a chance to see the ugly truth.

Brian
September 24, 2014 3:44 am

Jail? Isn’t that a little harsh?
Maybe they should just get two years of probation and 1,500 hours of community service.
Then again, they’re probably not as well connected as RFK, Jr.

Johanus
September 24, 2014 3:48 am

Jailing opponents of wacky government-sponsored environmental theories is not new.
In 1928, Trofim Lysenko, a previously unknown Soviet agronomist, claimed to have developed an agricultural technique, termed vernalization, which tripled or quadrupled crop yield by exposing wheat seed to high humidity and low temperature.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysenkoism
Lysenko’s theories of environmentally acquired characteristics were not compatible with the accepted theories of genetics in the West, but found greate political favor in the Communist party which ruled Russia at the time. For decades, Lysenkos’s opponents were hounded and ostracized, some were jailed and executed.

Lysenko was supported by the Soviet propaganda machine, which overstated his successes and omitted mention of his failures. This was accompanied by fake experimental data supporting Lysenkoism from scientists seeking favor and the destruction of counter-evidence to Lysenko’s theories. Instead of performing controlled experiments, Lysenko claimed that vernalization increased wheat yields by 15%, solely based upon questionnaires taken of farmers.

On August 7, 1948, the V.I. Lenin Academy of Agricultural Sciences announced that from that point on Lysenkoism would be taught as “the only correct theory”. Soviet scientists were forced to denounce any work that contradicted Lysenko’s research. Criticism of Lysenko was denounced as “bourgeois” or “fascist”, and analogous “non-bourgeois” theories also flourished in other fields in the Soviet academy at this time

In 1948, genetics was officially declared “a bourgeois pseudoscience”, all geneticists were fired from their jobs (some were also arrested), and all genetic research was discontinued. Nikita Khrushchev, who claimed to be an expert in agricultural science, also valued Lysenko as a great scientist, and the taboo on genetics continued (but all geneticists were released or rehabilitated posthumously). The ban was only waived in the mid-1960s.

Striking parallels to what is going on right now, which is on a much larger scale than Lysenkoism.

September 24, 2014 3:49 am

Stalin said name the man and I will name the crime. Easy peasy.

September 24, 2014 3:58 am

Peter, after watching the Kennedy video I decided to go underground. I did a search using “punish skeptics” and words like that, and I found a bunch of really scary comments and articles by people who otherwise would be considered normal.
One of the comments was by a lady professor (Norgaard) who felt I was crazy if i didn´t believe in the IPCC reports, and my lack of faith required treatment by the appropriate medical personnel equipped with the latest mind bending and altering drugs.
Then there was a guy who wrote I should be executed. Another wrote I should be put in jail (that´s nice). The whole crew sounds like a bunch of bin Ladens with a very serious religious mania.

Death to Green Fascists
September 24, 2014 3:59 am

[Snip. Please use a legitimate email address. ~ mod.]

latecommer2014
Reply to  Death to Green Fascists
September 24, 2014 6:19 am

Yes, I will. Do you know any “green fascists”? I know fascists from history, and they all took suicidal paths. Eventually they collapse on their own. Personally I ignore their opinions since I know they are very good at self distruction.

mpainter
Reply to  Death to Green Fascists
September 24, 2014 11:37 am

I will comment. Peter, I am surprised that such a cognomen would pass moderation. This name is new on this blog and I suspect its origin. I deplore its use on this blog.

RockyRoad
Reply to  Death to Green Fascists
September 24, 2014 10:05 pm

Did you write that to use as an undeniable straw man, Peter?
You cad, you.

Col Mosby
September 24, 2014 4:06 am

RFK Jr is the same liar who claimed at the time of Katrina that it would just be the start of a
massive wave of more and bigger hurricanes. What about the hardships he caused by persuading homeowners to sell their coastal properties at losses on the basis of his words?

September 24, 2014 4:07 am

Silence the cries of integrity and freedom – that is how the roaches work.

Cheshirered
September 24, 2014 4:16 am

A sure sign they’ve lost the central global warming argument.
We’re seeing this more and more; intentionally bogus projections of false allegations followed by these geniuses revealing their chosen way of ‘solving’ the imagined problem.
If there was an up-to-date scorecard of climate & energy alarmism v realism, realists would be shown to be holding a huge, unassailable lead.
Hence desperate times call for desperate measures. He’s lost the greatest argument in politically-driven scientific history – and what’s more, he knows he’s lost.

Andyj
September 24, 2014 4:38 am

RFK jr. is not “green” at all.
For starters .. Six children..
[snip – no need to name the children -mod]
Imaging the size of each of their lifetimes carbon footprint multiplied by their offspring, then their offspring in turn. Entirely his fault.
I guess that makes him a liar in my book. It’s not the denier who should be on the stake for telling the truth. Its the loony who throws fireballs in his own wood houses… Which reminds me. His house..
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2765736/Robert-F-Kennedy-Jr-Cheryl-Hines-s-5-million-Malibu-mansion-complete-recording-studio-two-storey-tree-house.html
not a Solar pool heater or Solar panel in sight. I see he does not use a push lawnmower. Or bicycles. It’s a long way to go to NY. Did he take one of those coaches? Nah! He has a stinking great Lexus.
One commenter in this link said it well. “Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is notorious for leading the opposition to the Cape Wind project off Cape Cod in Massachusetts because it would supposedly spoil his view from the Kennedy Compound, when he’s not flying in private jets to warmer winter climates. … Hypocrisy, thy name is Kennedy.”

David A
Reply to  Andyj
September 24, 2014 5:15 am

When one’s ignorance is only exceeded by arrogance is a sad day.

rogerknights
Reply to  David A
September 24, 2014 6:03 am

“agnorance”

Mike H.
Reply to  David A
September 24, 2014 4:51 pm

Roger, apt coinage.

inMAGICn
Reply to  Andyj
September 24, 2014 11:46 am

Someone may have a source, but, as I recollect, one of the Kennedy family objections was that the off-shore wind farm would interfere with sailing regattas.

Col Klink
September 24, 2014 4:45 am

Bill of Rights Public Enemy Number 1 : Bobby Kennedy Jr
How about all those insurance companies who stopped writing hurricane policies
in the Coastal areas partly because they believed Boby Kennedy’s predictions
of larger and more deadly and more plentiful hurricanes? In the decades since,
the absence of hurricanes has resulted in huge losses to those companies.
How about class action lawsuit against Kennedy? What about all those who
sold their property at a loss and had to move? They can join the lawsuit.
How about jailing those who deny that global warming has not happened
for 18 years? They are the real deniers.

September 24, 2014 5:14 am

Reblogged this on gottadobetterthanthis and commented:
They mock the holocaust. They mock all sense of freedom. Then they come for you.
http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007392

hunter
September 24, 2014 5:21 am

RFK jr. is a recovering heroin addict, an inbred grifter on his grand father’s money, a parasite profiting off of his father’s tragic murder, and a democrat party elite, not to be redundant.

latecommer2014
September 24, 2014 5:40 am

Peter don’t include me and mine in your climate fantasy….we don’t like or need your concern.

Leon Brozyna
September 24, 2014 5:41 am

Just a step away from sending dissidents to re-education camps … or hospitalizing them for mental illness.

stevefitzpatrick
September 24, 2014 5:42 am

Perhaps, Mr. Kennedy, you will donate all your inherited wealth to support climate change alarm, and stop flying about in private planes. That would reduce your carbon footprint to closer to that of most everyone else. Don’t just talk the talk dude, walk the walk. Get back to us when your millions are disposed of and you have to worry about energy costs like most people on Earth do.

ozspeaksup
September 24, 2014 5:43 am

Id prefer for the warmists to be shut up for a brief while to remove their propaganda from the airwaves and give us all a stress free break having to keep fighting their time n life wasting idiocy
just a TOTAL ban for 6mths on claims of doom n gloom using the C word.

joelobryan
September 24, 2014 5:45 am

The rants of a heroin-addled left-wing Kennedy should be taken for what they are: a desperate cry for attention.
RFK Jr’s rant described is a peek into mind of Progressive insanity. There is a reason drug and alcohol-fueled deaths, suicides, and serial adultery follow this family.

PJ
September 24, 2014 5:57 am

I’m don’t think anyone has noted this yet, but it bears mentioning. RFK Jr. is a noted anti-vaccine conspiracy theorist who wrote an infamous article published in Rolling Stone in 2005 expounding upon his nutty theories.

inMAGICn
Reply to  PJ
September 24, 2014 11:49 am

Salon, I thing (maybe both). Salon had to issue numerous corrections and withdrew it completely in 2011. RFK Jr. has the original posted somewhere (so I’ve read).

inMAGICn
Reply to  inMAGICn
September 24, 2014 11:49 am

I thing? I think…
(I Robot, I Thing.)

ferdberple
September 24, 2014 6:03 am

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.[

inMAGICn
Reply to  ferdberple
September 24, 2014 11:50 am

Executive order.

DirkH
Reply to  inMAGICn
September 24, 2014 12:15 pm

That is a presidential order to the members of the executive branch; not a law.

inMAGICn
Reply to  inMAGICn
September 24, 2014 12:35 pm

Don’t be pedantic, please. You know what I mean.

rogerknights
September 24, 2014 6:08 am

My interpretation is that he has been marinated in climate porn and he trusts them and their cartoonish demonization of contrarians. He’s far from alone in this–many of his fellow marchers have been similarly marinated. It’s inconceivable to them that their side could be as badly wrong on this issue as it is. So they think the worst of us.
Even if the bottom falls out of their bandwagon and the climate cools, they won’t repent. They’ll say that the world needs clean renewable sustainable power, and the sooner the better.

ferdberple
Reply to  rogerknights
September 24, 2014 7:04 am

the world needs AFFORDABLE, RELIABLE, ON-DEMAND, clean renewable sustainable power
I see nothing wrong with the above statement. I expect most of us would agree. I would be very happy to have a compact, low cost fusion generator that ran on tap water and produced all the energy I required, with helium as the only waste product. I would very much prefer this to having to fill my car with gasoline.
The problem comes when people say that in order to achieve this, we must FIRST do away with all forms of energy that are less than perfect. That we should ignore affordable, reliable and on-demand as important aspects of energy production.
That somehow, by demanding a perfect soultion, and rejecting any solution that has side effects, this will somehow ensure perfection. One might consider Cancer Treatment as a similar problem. The medicine to treat cancer has terrible side effects. Should we stop giving the medicine, and thereby force people to come up with a treatment that has no side effects?
People may argue that fossil fuel is not cancer treatment, but consider how many people would quickly die if we suddenly stopped the flow of coal, oil and gas. Billions would not survive more than a few months.
Voiltaie wrote that “Perfect is the Enemy of Good.” Perfection can never be optained, except at infinite price. In seeking perfection we end up throwing out all the good solutions that are available, the ones that we can afford, and end up with no solution. In seeking to prevent all harm, we end up doing great harm.

September 24, 2014 6:14 am
Harry Passfield
September 24, 2014 6:14 am

@Peter Grace: I fear you are a wind-up artist getting some kicks from blogging here, but I’ll see if there’s anything of substance in you. I asked, up thread, “Wherefore the threat? Whereof the warming?” and you, in response to Hunter say:

[we agitate] to save your children and grand children from living and dying in miserable circumstances.

So, I say again, in your words if it helps, what ‘miserable circumstances’ and since when has a minor change in temp put you and yours at the risk of ‘dying’? I mean, I don’t know what latitude you live on but I guess that you are quite capable of surviving sunnier climes without the risk of death – or don’t you let your family take vacations in the sun?

ferdberple
September 24, 2014 6:22 am

RFK Jr wants to jail energy CEO’s for “Treason”
============
By that same logic, why not jail all people that have large carbon footprints? Why limit yourself to energy CEO’s? Surely there are many people in the US with huge carbon footprints. Why not put them all in jail?
Surely it must be a worse crime to actually emit the CO2, than it is to provide energy. The energy CEO’s they are like gun manufacturers. The people with large carbon footprints, aren’t they the ones that are actually pulling the trigger? Harming the rest of us.
So, by the logic of RFK Jr, shouldn’t we be calling for jail time for all peoples with large carbon footprints? Not just the people that manufacture the guns, but also the people that are pulling the trigger?
Aren’t Dxniers simply people saying that guns themselves are harmless, that we should be allowed to have guns for protection? Aren’t the real criminals the people tat are pulling the trigger on the innocent? The people with the large carbon footprints?

Reply to  ferdberple
September 24, 2014 7:24 am

Excellent bit of logic. I plan to steal this idea, and use it in some discussion, to see how it flies.
Not that I actually believe that anyone should be jailed for emitting CO2. However it is always fun to use another’s argument against them.

Mickey Reno
September 24, 2014 6:39 am

Good god, this is horrible. I’m surprised that a son of a world-renowned American politician could ever drift so far from American traditions. The 1st Amendment means nothing to him, obviously. More frightening is that a large piece of a Progressives and climate alarmists who agree with him. We need serious changes in our public education system.

B Dixon
Reply to  Mickey Reno
September 24, 2014 6:41 am

Democrats crave a dictator ship. Control over every aspect of our lives.

D.J. Hawkins
Reply to  Mickey Reno
September 24, 2014 2:23 pm

If the 1st Amendment is ill-regarded by this punk, be sure he’ll not fare well when he runs up against the 2nd.

B Dixon
September 24, 2014 6:39 am

This coming from a man whose family’s environmental impact is greater than 1000 middles class family’s combined!

John Boles
September 24, 2014 6:42 am

Good term; watermelons, reminds me of a song…
You say you want a revolution
Well, you know We all want to change the world
You tell me that it’s evolution
Well, you know We all want to change the world
But when you talk about destruction
Don’t you know that you can count me out
Don’t you know it’s gonna be all right?
All right, all right
You say you got a real solution
Well, you know
We’d all love to see the plan
You ask me for a contribution
Well, you know
We’re all doing what we can
But if you want money
For people with minds that hate
All I can tell is brother you have to wait
Don’t you know it’s gonna be all right?
All right, all right
You say you’ll change the constitution
Well, you know
We all want to change your head
You tell me it’s the institution
Well, you know
You better free you mind instead
But if you go carrying pictures of chairman Mao
You ain’t going to make it with anyone anyhow
Don’t you know it’s gonna be all right?
All right, all right!

ossqss
September 24, 2014 6:48 am

Mr. Kennedy, can we please review your investment portfolio for treasonous investments?
Can anyone smell the hypocrite in the air……

George E. Smith
September 24, 2014 7:32 am

I actually thought his dad was quite smart, although I disagreed with his political leanings.
But this guy is a real piece of work.
I watched the less than reverend Moon tell a room full of dead beats that climate change was the defining issue of our time.
I wonder how much extra plant food has been added to the atmosphere as a result of this united nothing séance in New York.
I’m sorry, I likely won’t be around, to witness a future new world without Kennedys, Clintons, and Kerrys.
What did we do to deserve these plagues ??

J.Hawk
September 24, 2014 7:46 am

Lenin and Stalin had similar views of people with whom they disagreed.

Mark Kiwiet
September 24, 2014 7:47 am

Here’s my idea – lets just start calling them “Climate Change Hoax Deniers” – this way we can return all the civility and rational reactions right back at them.

September 24, 2014 7:53 am

good.
we should get him to say it more often.

LogosWrench
September 24, 2014 7:54 am

Yep that’s how lefty rolls, has rolled, snd will always roll. When they run on feelings and not facts all opposition needs to go jail. Why? Because evey fact is a crack in the eiifice of their made up world. Shrill vitriolic nonsense.
Typical.

LogosWrench
September 24, 2014 8:04 am

Actually the more I think about it when one considers the policy especially to the third world and desperate poverty a-holes like him and others inflict, maybe alarmists should be heading to the Hole.

DataTurk
September 24, 2014 8:07 am

I sometimes think that, while bad ideas and actions are not exclusive to the group, Progressives tend to latch onto “high concept” ideas more readily than your typical conservative. This makes them particularly vulnerable to simple-sounding propositions and forceful, drastic over-reaction.
Eugenics would be a good example in support of the proposition, and since we are talking about simple science, simple souls, and simple remedies, I see no need to offer arguments against.
Instead, I will offer a proposition thus:
1. Fundamentalists …of any kind… always get it wrong.
2. There are no exceptions to (1).
3. If you think you are the exception, see (2) above.
I would be interested in any examples that disprove.

Steve P
Reply to  DataTurk
September 24, 2014 8:29 am

Define Fundamentalists
Words, unlike numbers, do not have fixed values.

Steve P
Reply to  Steve P
September 24, 2014 8:39 am

I make this point because, as a young man, I was often instructed to master the fundamentals . This is good advice. I learned the fundamentals of basketball – like throwing, catching, and dribbling the ball – before I started to develop more advanced plays like the deadly cross-over dribble, jump stop, head ‘n’ shoulder fake, and the fall-away J.
No high 5s needed.

DataTurk
Reply to  Steve P
September 24, 2014 2:15 pm

I suppose it would be those who prefer ideology to reason.
I believe in these principles very strongly, to the point where I’m afraid that all that may apply to me, too.

inMAGICn
Reply to  DataTurk
September 24, 2014 11:55 am

Mathematicians?

Gary Pearse
September 24, 2014 8:15 am

There definitely has been some deterioration in Kennedy gene pool. Probably JFK was all they had.

September 24, 2014 8:16 am

The fellow in the video still thinks he is 19.
Probably the last time he had an original thought.
Third generation of inherited wealth? Say no more.

janus
September 24, 2014 8:30 am

Those who are not old enough to remember the communistic (socialistic) block:
The Brezhnev Doctrine was a Soviet Union foreign policy, first and most clearly outlined by S. Kovalev in a September 26, 1968 Pravda article, entitled “Sovereignty and the International Obligations of Socialist Countries.” Leonid Brezhnev reiterated it in a speech at the Fifth Congress of the Polish United Workers’ Party on November 13, 1968, which stated:
Eastern Bloc
When forces that are hostile to socialism try to turn the development of some socialist country towards capitalism, it becomes not only a problem of the country concerned, but a common problem and concern of all socialist countries.
This doctrine was announced to retroactively justify the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia in August 1968 that ended the Prague Spring, along with earlier Soviet military interventions, such as the invasion of Hungary in 1956

MarkW
September 24, 2014 8:32 am

A couple of weeks ago, almost every Democrat in congress voted in support of a proposed new amendment to the constitution that would pretty much eliminate free speech in the US.

MarkW
Reply to  MarkW
September 24, 2014 8:33 am

Democrats in the Senate. The House hasn’t voted on the amendment, though many in the House have been vocal in their support of it.

Ralph Kramden
September 24, 2014 8:39 am

called for climate deniers to be jailed
Statements like this are common among Alarmists. Alarmists are not really compatible with a democracy like America. They would prefer a totalitarian regime.

John Endicott
Reply to  Ralph Kramden
September 25, 2014 10:07 am

If they had their way America would be one such regime. Our current totalitarian in chief hsa been hard at work to make it happen.

richard
September 24, 2014 8:39 am

if i go to jail i hope it is in the same cell as Mr Watts and all, I would say Jo Nova but guess it is single sex cells. Wow, on this site I mentioned sex.

Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
Reply to  richard
September 25, 2014 2:55 pm

You could claim you gender identity rights were being violated by sharing cells with other men. That works for bathrooms, at least in California schools. Just hope you don’t have to learn to walk in heels.

more soylent green!
September 24, 2014 8:41 am

This is how statists, communists, dictators, totalitarians, etc., deal with dissent. Free expression is forbidden. The thought police are out there. As climate change is a bigger threat than terrorism, I fully expect the NSA to start monitoring our calls and emails for hints of climate change denialism.

September 24, 2014 8:41 am

Robert F. Kennedy Junior obviously has lost the climate focused argument. So, he wants to jail his critics.
It is hard to continue to be benevolent toward hate speaking people like Robert F. Kennedy Junior.
John

Tucci78
Reply to  John Whitman
September 24, 2014 9:45 am

At 8:41 AM on 24 September, John Whitman had written:

It is hard to continue to be benevolent toward hate speaking people like Robert F. Kennedy Junior.

Among the other benefits of growing up in a Sicilian-American family, I am grateful to those who’d nurtured me to manhood for the fact that I feel in no way encumbered by the sort of charitable impulse which would give the average American even the urge to micturate upon someone like this Kennedy creature were he to present in the process of demonstrating spontaneous human combustion.
Managgia Irlandesi.

Here, for those who have forgotten or just love to hear it all again, is the fulsome scurvy truth: Old Joseph P. Kennedy was a liar and a greedy thief, an ignoramus, adulterer, vile anti-Semite, coward, and pompous ass. His wife, Rose, was a frigid martinet, unashamed to suckle at the teat of shabby lucre, awash in pietism and Tartuffery, filled with the letter of Catholicism and empty of its spirit. They raised their nine whelps in an atmosphere of brutal pride and stupid competition. When the hapless Rosemary turned out to be retarded, they had her lobotomized and parked her with the nuns. The remaining eight turned out foolhardy, arrogant, unprincipled, and wholly lacking in sense of consequences. This last trait caused Joe Jr. and Kathleen to die in airplane crashes and allowed Jack to get his PT boat T-boned by a Japanese destroyer. (A tale of heroism was manufactured from that incident. The family wasn’t so lucky with Teddy’s Chappaquiddick skin-diving efforts three decades later.) The Kennedys, however, continued to wax. Elections, intellectuals, and press adulation were purchased. One family member rose, briefly, to great political power and almost unlimited sexual excess. Some others nearly achieved the same results. Two were shot, but under the most romantic circumstances and not, as might have been hoped, after due process of law. A third remains a fat dog in a Senate manger that’s overdue for mucking out. Thus the Kennedys excelled in every Irish vice and learned others strange to the sons of Erin, such as simony and lust. Then comes the morally satisfying third act, when the last generation of Kennedys reaps the trust-fund dividends of sin. They wallow in drugs and indolence, perform wild acts of self-destruction and roll in social manure. At Studio 54, Xenon, and Danceteria, they fritter away the advantage and wealth gained by their loathsome ancestors. They overdose and get arrested and, best of all, disappear from the public eye. Just desserts! Just hors d’oeuvres! A just main course of crow!
— P.J. O’Rourke, Give War a Chance (1992)

Reply to  Tucci78
September 24, 2014 1:14 pm

Wow, P.J. Now tell us what you really think. LOL!
But he makes some good points…

Steve P
Reply to  Tucci78
September 24, 2014 2:44 pm

P.J. O’Rourke does not impress me in the least, save as an ill-informed loudmouth.
He blames Joe Kennedy Jr. for being killed while on a dangerous mission in WWII. Even when you’re a hero, you may be “…wholly lacking in sense of consequences… to this flame spewing dimwit.

hunter
September 24, 2014 9:40 am

Peter,
Your misantropic obsession regarding climate is putting my children and grandchildren at risk. And is costing the world the equivalent of a medium sized war daily already.
Take your faux concern and your apocalyptic claptrap and put it where the sun don’t shine.
Why won’t you kooks stick with UFO’s, past lives and Area 51?

dp
September 24, 2014 9:42 am

Does there exist any scientist who’s views you respect that has produced data that believably explains the observed record? The models don’t work and both sides agree, and the observed record does not abide the rhetoric that accompanies the modeled results. None of the scientists I read can reconcile the travesty that is the divergence between modeled climate and observed climate.

RockyRoad
Reply to  dp
September 24, 2014 10:10 pm

The non-reconciliation has reached criminal proportions, actually.
Steps have been taken recently to keep coal from being shipped to India, where fully a THIRD of their population has no electricity.
We can thank the alarmists for influencing Portland, OR for rejecting plans for a coal-loading facility.
Keeping the people of India in the dark by stopping fuel from reaching them should be a crime against humanity.

September 24, 2014 10:04 am

At the risk of offending any Americans with fond memories of a certain, fairly mediocre, deceased President, aren’t this mans family renowned for thinking with a part of their anatomy, that is located somewhat lower down than is the norm?

Dudley Horscroft
Reply to  krb981
September 24, 2014 10:55 am

Acting with it, perhaps. Thinking? No.

Andyj
Reply to  krb981
September 24, 2014 12:03 pm

Are you hinting the Kennedy’s are well endowed? I thought it was the little people who attempt to attain greatness.

Steve P
Reply to  krb981
September 24, 2014 2:46 pm

One is never offended by fools, only astonished.

Bitter&Twisted
September 24, 2014 10:40 am

The Kennedy curse strikes again.
RFK was born an imbecile.

Curious George
September 24, 2014 10:43 am

This guy does probably talk to his house plants like Prince Charles. Aristocracy.

The Definition Guy
September 24, 2014 11:07 am

“We have met the enemy and he is us.”- Pogo

Andyj
September 24, 2014 12:01 pm

To MOD’s.
RFK Jr’s six carbon burning children were listed by me and deleted by you. This was a straight copy/paste off wiki.
So, your morality is high but your action was moot. 😉

Patrick Lyons
September 24, 2014 12:28 pm

RFK, Jr. demands intolerance for anyone expressing an opinion contrary to our government’s climate dogma, reminding me of Orwell’s 1984. As Voltaire stated, “It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong”. No longer is there a search for truth since, as we are told, the science is settled. How long before our government takes seriously such a position as RFK, Jr. espouses?

September 24, 2014 12:53 pm

What a knob

Dav09
September 24, 2014 12:56 pm

“. . . take the posters at their word unless there is sufficient reason to believe otherwise.”
Admirable sentiment, but on past behaviour (incessant bald-faced lying by CAGW pushers) CAGW pushing in and of itself is more than sufficient reason to believe otherwise.

Ghandi
September 24, 2014 1:46 pm

Sig Heil, Herr Kennedy! I have read that the Nazis started with Robert Jr.’s type of thinking. So much for a legacy of liberty and freedom. This man is a fascist.

Dav09
September 24, 2014 1:56 pm

dbstealey says (September 24, 2014 at 1:14 pm)

Wow, P.J. Now tell us what you really think. LOL!
But he makes some good points . . . /blockquote>
A little further on in the same piece he makes some even better ones:

Collier and Horowitz also fail to explain how these sewer trout managed to swim upstream into our body politic. The authors, typical pundits, attribute the Kennedy rise to the family’s pet intellectuals. This is giving the American public too little credit. We may be dumb, but we’re not so dumb that we ever spent a minute listening to Theodore Sorensen. Neither were lickspittle journalists at fault (though not through lack of trying by the likes of Joe Alsop). We have no one to blame for the Kennedys but ourselves. We took the Kennedys to heart of our own accord. And it is my opinion that we did it, not because we respected them or thought what they proposed was good, but because they were pretty. We, the electorate, were smitten with this handsome, vivacious family.
We got a mad crush on the lot of them. They were so stylish, so charming, and – at least in their public moments – so gracefully behaved. We wanted to hug their golden tossled heads to our dumpy breasts.
This may be the stupidest thing that has ever happened in a democracy. And certainly it shows an emptiness at the center of our lives. A desire to adore a head of state is a grim transgression against republicanism. It is worse than having a head of state who demands to be adored. It is worse even than forced adoration of the state itself. And this puts the Collier/Horowitz book in another light. It’s ourselves we should be flailing. Trust hubris to bring such trash as Kennedys to their knees. They are but few and a passing evil. We are another matter. There are 230 some million of us, and we’d better start talking sense to ourselves soon. The President of the United States is our employee. The services he and his legislative cohorts contract for us are not gifts or benefices. We have to pay for every one of them, sometimes with our money, sometimes with our skins.
If we can remember this we’ll get a good, dull Cincinnatus like Eisenhower or Coolidge. Our governance will be managed with quiet and economy. We’ll have no need to go looking for Kennedys to love. And no need to boil over with hatred for them later.

Dav09
September 24, 2014 2:07 pm

dbstealey says (September 24, 2014 at 1:14 pm)

Wow, P.J. Now tell us what you really think. LOL!
But he makes some good points . . .

A little further on in the same piece he makes some even better ones:

Collier and Horowitz also fail to explain how these sewer trout managed to swim upstream into our body politic. The authors, typical pundits, attribute the Kennedy rise to the family’s pet intellectuals. This is giving the American public too little credit. We may be dumb, but we’re not so dumb that we ever spent a minute listening to Theodore Sorensen. Neither were lickspittle journalists at fault (though not through lack of trying by the likes of Joe Alsop). We have no one to blame for the Kennedys but ourselves. We took the Kennedys to heart of our own accord. And it is my opinion that we did it, not because we respected them or thought what they proposed was good, but because they were pretty. We, the electorate, were smitten with this handsome, vivacious family.
We got a mad crush on the lot of them. They were so stylish, so charming, and – at least in their public moments – so gracefully behaved. We wanted to hug their golden tossled heads to our dumpy breasts.
This may be the stupidest thing that has ever happened in a democracy. And certainly it shows an emptiness at the center of our lives. A desire to adore a head of state is a grim transgression against republicanism. It is worse than having a head of state who demands to be adored. It is worse even than forced adoration of the state itself. And this puts the Collier/Horowitz book in another light. It’s ourselves we should be flailing. Trust hubris to bring such trash as Kennedys to their knees. They are but few and a passing evil. We are another matter. There are 230 some million of us, and we’d better start talking sense to ourselves soon. The President of the United States is our employee. The services he and his legislative cohorts contract for us are not gifts or benefices. We have to pay for every one of them, sometimes with our money, sometimes with our skins.
If we can remember this we’ll get a good, dull Cincinnatus like Eisenhower or Coolidge. Our governance will be managed with quiet and economy. We’ll have no need to go looking for Kennedys to love. And no need to boil over with hatred for them later.

CarlF
September 24, 2014 2:20 pm

Expressing ones views on a subject is generally not a crime in the US. There are some exceptions these days (anything classified as hate speech for example). I suppose if they can get dissenting views on the weather classified as a hate crime, they could start jailing people. At that point, we will need to be careful about comments like “what a nice day it is today”.
What is a crime is to deprive others of their freedom of speech, which is clearly what Kennedy is advocating. I suggest it is Kennedy that needs to be jailed.

September 24, 2014 2:32 pm

People such as RFK jr. Are severely deficient in the area of imperical scientific study and, in the case of the U.S., Constitutional law regarding freedom of speech as well as a host of other federal and state laws. Our governments and the U.N. do not know what their talking about and most of the worlds population knows it. Going on fifteen years of NO AGW and they keep trying to feed us their line. Thanks, but no thanks.

Steve Allen
September 24, 2014 3:49 pm

RFK Jr. clearly reinforces the belief that talent typically skips a generation. What a jack hole.

September 24, 2014 7:05 pm

Mr. Kennedy sure is sounding like a Parkinson’s victim. While he is wishing ill upon his political opponents I wish him well with his health.
W^3

Nigel in Waterloo
September 24, 2014 7:54 pm

You can only be prosecuted for an actual crime that has been proven to have occurred. You can’t punish someone for a crime that you can’t prove even happened. Not believing in AGW is not a crime, unless your actions can be proven to have caused harm to someone. Good luck with that when it comes to the climate.
What ‘crime’ does he think skeptics will be prosecuted for? Making the Earth warmer? Is that a crime?

Reply to  Nigel in Waterloo
September 25, 2014 3:52 am

Certainly you can be punished for a non-crime. Happens all the time.
Are you a member of the Tea [Taxed Enough Already] Party? If you are audited by the IRS because of it, you’re being punished.
The NRA just had an article about banks and other financial instituions abruptly severing all credit lines from gun store owners. Businesses need credit to operate. They have committed no crimes. They are being punished for engaging in lawful business.
The list is getting longer. Kennedy is just a symptom.

u.k.(us)
September 24, 2014 8:38 pm

The thoughts a 10 year old would know not to express in public, in a republic.
Makes one wonder……….

Dr. S. Jeevananda Reddy
September 25, 2014 12:32 am

Unfortunately the politicians have no knowledge on what is climate change. Let them worry on how much pollution/greenhouse gases are pumped in to the atmosphere through wars in recent years — more particularly after 1951. Let these politicians look at before making such statements!!!
Dr. S. Jeevananda Reddy

SteveP
September 25, 2014 2:31 am
NikFromNYC
September 25, 2014 2:37 am

I think drones above are controlling his neck muscles. He already died a few years ago. He is now the twenty million dollar man. His empty goal is to identify the low IQ citizens of America, once and for all.

Cream Bourbon
September 25, 2014 3:40 am

Interesting edit of the start of that video. I wonder exactly who he was suggesting should be jailed. Appears to me that some context is missing.

Reply to  Cream Bourbon
September 30, 2014 3:29 am

Wow. No clue there. Wanna buy one?

September 25, 2014 4:46 am

Of course they want “deniers” to be jailed. But that’s only to set a precedent. What they really want is all opponents of Marxism to be jailed. Anybody who has the “wrong” thoughts must be silenced.

rtj1211
September 25, 2014 7:48 am

I must say that a criminal trial of a climate skeptic would be extremely annoying, but would also offer an unparalleled opportunity to deliver devastating critiques of orthodoxy in a court of law, where witnesses must face cross-examination rather than simply pamphleteer, write propaganda for newspapers or the like.
All the greatest freedom fighters have ended up in court and all have proven themselves to be rather superior to the judges, the barristers and the prosecuting witnesses.
The interesting question is in which countries unbiased and significant coverage of the trial would be allowed by the authorities, since that would tell us a great deal about where true democracy and free speech is currently allowed to flourish on this planet.
I suspect that if the defendant(s) was(were) American(s), then RT would give it plenty of coverage. I suspect so would Tony Abbott’s lot in Australia. Beyond that, who knows? Breitbart?
One suspects that the new media, social media and the like would be most likely to cover it honestly, since there is a strong push for a uniform Global Establishment line to he taken and China is now appearing to move closer toward that tent.
However, it would still probably become one of the most studied trials of the 21st century to date.
1. Free speech vs ‘threat to humanity’? (Well, I don’t think there is one, but that’s the party line, isn’t it?)
2. ‘Clean’ vs ‘dirty’ energy? (An evaluation of just how dirty ‘dirty’ energy is and just how ‘clean’ clean energy is)
3. Political programmes vs ethical science?
4. Government propaganda vs rigorous journalism?
5. Corporate will vs democratic accountability?
A perfect brew of the central issues of our times…….all you need is for one of the defendants to be a participant in a gay marriage whilst being avowedly atheist and you’d add in religion as the last piece of the jigsaw!!

Eamon Butler
September 25, 2014 8:51 am

I’m saying this in all seriousness, so no mocking intended, but he does seem to have an intellectual disability. I’m not familiar with him, other than I know who he is, so maybe someone that side of the pond can confirm if he does or not. Just an observation from the clip posted.

Steve
September 25, 2014 4:02 pm

You know if those guys who sold videos about the moon landing being a fake could have thrown everyone in jail who knew basic science they could have sold a LOT more videos! Same thing here, skeptics are a threat to the gravy train of grants and funding for studying global warming. If only you guys would stop showing those irritating plots of global average temperature, you’re going to destroy my cash cow!

September 25, 2014 7:37 pm

Just an FYI the Google search result number is not accurate.

Dudley Horscroft
Reply to  Poptech
September 27, 2014 10:42 pm

Agreed – clicked on the http thingy and Google says it’s “about 267 000”.

September 26, 2014 2:56 am

What happened to free speech and free opinions of which the USA ethos is based on?

Patrick Maher
Reply to  David Spurgeon
September 28, 2014 9:28 pm

They were buried by decisions regarding the commerce clause, like the rest of the constitution. The commerce clause was intended to keep states from having unfair advantages over each other and to regulate trade with foreign nations. It has been reinterpreted to mean that the federal government has little or no restriction on what they can control. If you give me a penny you find on the ground in NY and there’s a chance I might go across the country and buy a piece of gum then that penny could possibly affect commerce in California. Anything that may affect commerce in any way may be regulated under the commerce clause. And everything that may affect commerce is regulated by the feds.

bill hunter
September 27, 2014 2:11 pm

What a great proof that brains are not inherited!

bill hunter
September 27, 2014 2:15 pm

Far Out! I don’t have to give up my gas guzzling luxury vehicle until somebody buys me an electric car. . . .Hallelujah!!!

Patrick Maher
September 28, 2014 5:08 pm

Article III, Section 3, Clause 1 US Constitution: “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”
Hey Bob jr. <–[RFK, Jr. ~ mod.] How does denying CAGW fit under the constitutional description of treason? What you're describing, jailing them based upon your say so without trial is called a bill of attainder. It is constitutionally prohibited at both the federal and state level. (Article I, Section 3, Clauses 9 and 10) Maybe that's why you want them at the Hague, to avoid having to allow them those pesky rights and protections the Constitution puts in your way. But what's the Constitution when it comes to enforcing your "rational minded" opinion about science?

%d bloggers like this: