A murderous act – the "kill climate deniers" theater project

When, if ever, will we see the reasonable and educated people in the warmer side of climate debate speak out against hateful garbage like this? What will it take? Why would government fund what amounts to a sanctioned hate crime disguised as “art”? This is just bizarre.


The stage is an island, where’s that sea level rise when we need it?


Andrew Bolt writes:

The Left is the natural home of the modern totalitarian – and of all those who feel entitled by their superior morality to act as savages.

How how the ACT Government justify spending taxpayers’ money on a theatre work entitled ”Kill Climate Deniers”?


What sane Government donates to a project urging others to kill fellow citizens, even as a “joke”? Are these people mad?


Here is the web page of the Aspen island Theatre Company. They say:

Aspen Island Theatre Company is dedicated to the creation of contemporary Australian theatre in Canberra. We seek to make theatre that is intelligent and inventive and engages with the present.

Really? A play about killing people some disagree with is “intelligent and inventive”? Maybe I’m confusing them with ISIS?

Their contact page is here: http://aspenisland.com.au/contact/


225 thoughts on “A murderous act – the "kill climate deniers" theater project

  1. Left speaking. ‘It is OK if we do it BUT if others do it to us it is bullying. We are the victims.’ This is the common response.

  2. $18,793? Haven’t they learned to round-up and homogenise their numbers yet? Or maybe that last 3 is there for realism. A bit like saying 97% when you really want the punters to think 100%.

  3. Ironically, the more extreme the positions become, the more the majority start to say, “Hey wait a minute.” As I explained in my book “The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science”, most people don’t know how far to go with a new paradigm, in this case environmentalism. I used to wonder what role the extremists play. The answer is to define the limits for the majority.

  4. As Mark Steyn notes, “Perhaps the Government of the Australian Capital Territory could just eliminate the middle man and give me $18,793 to kill myself.”
    But I wouldn’t be too hard on the arts community. Whenever government money is available they be [first] in line, with their hands out. It’s kind of a conditioned reflex.

    • They haven’t got $18,793 for each Denier that kills himself–there’s way too many and it would break their bank.

    • There is an old Persian definition of a poet as being “a proud beggar.” They are proud about being associated with a type of truth that is associated with, but dissimilar to, scientific truth. To a true artist “Truth is Beauty.”
      What this means is that a true artist is not likely to accept government money if the government wants him to lie for the money. Therefore those who the government gets lining up for money tend to be the con-artists, rather than the true artists. If you look at the art in propaganda posters you always notice a sort of starkness, and a lack of beauty.
      Not that a true artist isn’t tempted by wealth. If you look at the lives of the better artists you often see them get entangled with a wealthy patron who asks them to fib too much (perhaps asking them to paint a picture that makes the patron look better than they actually look.) The artist tends to then, one way or another, go crazy. You see it over and over, in lives as different as Mozart’s and Woody Guthrie’s. The patron eventually fires the artist, or the artists walked out on the opportunity for “easy money”, and the artist winds up poorer, but happier.
      The “Aspen Island Theatre Company” is, in this particular case, hopefully attempting to satire an insane attitude rather than promote it, however if they are actually promoting the insane attitude they are no more true artists than certain “Climate Scientists” are true scientists.

    • Hey, you first.

      First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
      Because I was not a Socialist.
      Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
      Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
      Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
      Because I was not a Jew.
      Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
      Protestant pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984)

      • “Protestant pastor Martin Niemöller”
        Not really. Martin Niemöller was a Communist who won the Lenin Peace Prize for his work helping the ‘more evil than Nazi’ Soviets.

      • To Erick’s earlier reply: Being a Protestant pastor and being a communist are not mutually exclusive, so even if Niemoller WAS a communist (and make no mistake, I hate communism), that wouldn’t prove he wasn’t a Protestant pastor. And indeed he was a Protestant (Lutheran) pastor, and he was actively involved, along with Karl Barth and Dietrich Bonhoeffer, in starting the Confessing Church in Germany, opposing Nazism. His winning the Lenin Peace Prize is not evidence that he was a communist but that he was an advocate for peace (as he understood it). He was, in fact, a pacifist (at least according to the Wiki article about him), though early in life he had served in the German military (WW I). See http://www.britannica.com/holocaust/article-9055786.

  5. Beside the totalitarian aspect, and besides it being very wrong, and besides the scientific cluelessness, is their fantastic idea that a just a handful of “deniers” are in their way. A handful who can be done away with, and then everything will be hunky-dory.
    There is no reality with these people, no there there, one might communicate with.

  6. Just days ago, the Green apologists were out in full force decrying the videos of nutjobs at the NY Climate marches, telling us that it was unseemly for WUWT to point out the darker side of the climate fearosphere.
    Come back, you Greenies and rationalize this play for us.

    • Just so, Alan.
      They also need to be reminded of this:
      If you open the door to violence, don’t complain if it gets too rough for you.

    • Yes, there were several posters, like me, who thought that that edited video focusing exclusively on the “nutjobs” at the Climate March was not worthy of WUWT. I similarly think that your attempt to smear me and my fellow critics are as “Green apologists” or Greenies is misguided and unworthy of WUWT.

      • And yet you call yourself “Madman”?
        Are we really supposed to take your comment seriously, or is it the ranting of a…. (wait for it)…. madman?

      • So, Madman…
        Always on the ready to tell skeptics how unworthy of a job we’re doing (twice now by your admission)? It appears to me you are avoiding, or possibly “methinks thou dost protest too much”.
        Anthony asks, “When, if ever, will we see the reasonable and educated people in the warmer side of climate debate speak out against hateful garbage like this? What will it take?”
        Assuming you in that category of “reasonable and educated”? Would you like to respond to the question posed?
        That seems to me to be the topic of this thread and I would love to hear the answer, from you or anyone else not in the skeptic camp to better understand.
        And then my own questions, please…
        Do you think this play and funding of it by a government supposing to represent all the people would be over the top, just right or don’t go far enough? Short answer is fine, essay if you desire.
        If you’ve already weighed in on this, I apologize in advance, but would still love to get a review.

      • ???
        I saw similar picture video themes at a number of news sites including Yahoo and Wall Street Journal.
        Finding, er, the less curious marcher must’ve been hard on the photographers; especially as crazy odd news sells and that march certainly had more than it’s share.
        Just watching the news films with group after group waving socialistic, communistic, or just anti-democracy or anti-capitalism flags and signs. The march looked much more like a anti-America march than the ‘climate change’ march it is claimed to be.
        Interviews and interviewees sounded like we were back during the occupy movement.

      • Perhaps they should have referred to them as “Madmen” instead of “nutjobs”? Is that better?

  7. People who believe in a cause are capable of rationalizing almost any horrific act ….
    A long tine ago, when I was a Midshipman at USNA, I went home with my best friend (who was also a Midshipman) over Xmas break. His sister was a wild eyed anti-war (Vietnam War) college kid who belonged to the Weather Underground. She signed all her letters to her brother ‘The Revolution is coming’ and other pithy sayings. she would attempt to convert us to her way of thinking, but had a great deal of trouble when we failed to ‘see the light’. She railed about ‘police brutality’ and the government’s use of violence to ‘suppress them’ and seemed to think it was perfectly okay for them to kill police & others. when my best friend asked her why it was okay for her to use violence and not okay for the government, her response was. “because we’re right and they are wrong”
    If you think you’re right, you can justify almost any act as long as it contributes to the ‘just cause’.

    • Those Weather Underground folks are in charge now in the USA. They are the “progressive””useful idiots” of “neo-soviet” central planners. These Communists are using all the CAGW dupes to gain control of as much as they can. The ends justify the means.

  8. Start with an extreme position and end up with a program that sounds reasonable in comparison … a re-education camp to help all skeptics see the errors of their ways.

  9. The Aspen Island site doesn’t have a synopsis of their plot. Maybe the play is a biting satire about frenzied greens and rhetorical excesses. I know it’s a low-probability option, but we wouldn’t want a no-information rush to judgment.

    • I was thinking the same thing. I could be a spoof. Of course, when it comes to CAGW alarmism, everything sounds like a spoof…

      • Me too. To be cutting edge these days would be to question the ever drearier tide of unthinking dogma – for anyone with an imagination it is truly boring. If not, probably just the usual product of over privileged attention seekers riddled with guilt and feelings of purposelessness but too lazy minded to do anything useful about it.

    • Agreed. This is art and art is generally meant to be controversial and thought provoking. To criticise it without even knowing what its about is silly.

      • ” art is generally meant to be controversial ”
        Cultural Marxist “art”, yes. Leave me alone with your shit-art, and i mean that literally, with the piss-art as well.

      • Um, just how “controversial” is Leonardo’s Vitruvian Man? The Mona Lisa? Rodin’s Thinking Man? The list goes on and on…. The idea that art needs to be controversial is a modern invention designed to justify a lot of bad art and politics as art. Art needs only be pleasing to someone, even folks who do not want controversy. Think Ansel Adams photos…
        I don’t need to know much more than that the title says they want to kill me. Doesn’t matter how much lipstick gets put on that pig, it is still a death threat. Like standing at the airport and talking about ‘boom stuff’ or telling a judge you will to have them dispatched: Some Things don’t take a lot of think time to get you busted.
        Now, just for grins, do the ‘reflective game’ thing: Ask yourself just what would happen to a request to make a film called “Kill Climate Scientists”? (Or how long it would take to be sued for making a film titled “Kill Hockey Still Mann”…) Both of those would be clearly (and correctly) torched as ‘beyond the pale’ and possibly “hate speach”. So, in that ‘Good for the Goose, good for the Gander’ reflective way; so too must this play be seen as a hate crime.

      • E.M.Smith writes “I don’t need to know much more than that the title says they want to kill me. ”
        Do you identify yourself as a “climate denier” ?

        • It matters not if HE does. They make the determination – as did the Nazis 80 years ago (beyond the Jews, there were many other “undesirables”).

      • Gee, Tim. I do NOT describe myself as a climate denier.
        But it doesn’t matter what “I” call myself. The climate crimes thought police call ME a climate denier, and the leading democratic party politicians and their climate catastro-police have told THEIR blind, deaf, and dumb followers that “I” should be imprisoned and murdered BY the international climate police.
        So, when my tax dollars pay for elephant dung smeared over MY religious paintings, but YOU cannot even condemn cr*p but praise it officially and in the “art galleries” why should “I” have any respect for any other thought that may randomly enter your head, then be flushed out for public comment?

      • TimTheToolMan
        Agreed. This is art and art is generally meant to be controversial and thought provoking. To criticise it without even knowing what its about is silly.

        There are people with an unstable mind out there. They could carry out this nasty act “without even knowing what its about”. A bit like the theater act. I bet you very few of them understand the failure of the IPCCs projections, the deceleration of sea level rise etc. What if you replaced the D word with Warmist. I certainly would not support it.
        Here are the unstable minds I am telling you about.

        Daily Telegraph – 1 Mar 2010
        Baby survives parents’ global warming suicide pact
        A seven-month-old girl survived for three days alone with a bullet in her chest after being shot by her parents as part of a suicide pact over their fears about global warming.

      • TimTheToolMan,
        Here is another unstable mind.

        CTV News – 1 September, 2010
        Police kill gunman who held 3 at U.S. Discovery Channel
        Police shot and killed a man upset with the U.S. Discovery Channel network’s programming who took two employees and a security officer hostage at the company’s headquarters Wednesday, officials said. All three hostages escaped safely…………
        He also railed against “programs promoting War” and said solutions should be found for global warming and automotive and factory pollution.

      • Jimbino: “There are people with an unstable mind out there.”
        Also unstable minds like mine, who read that Climate Alarmists want to kill me and think “Okay, if those are the rules you want to play by. I’ll adjust my ROE accordingly”

      • Yah know Tim: I think I have the “plot” figured out.
        Now, since this “artist” group is already known to be “dis-honest” artists (con-artists is the appropriate term described above for “artists” who con the taxpayers out of their money to make the con-sartist richer and happier) by forcing the taxpayers to pay the con-artists for hate-filled religious dogma, we expect them to lie, cheat, steal (well, they’ve already done that) and exaggerate.
        …. Truly, we cannot really know what this propaganda (er, play) will say. We don’t have to: It is up to these con-artists to falsify our premise of their hatred.
        But I can bet that the “eco-terrorists in the play will be “deniers” who kidnap and murder to force the innocent and good-natured loving government officials – who are ONLY in their long, stress-filled jobs out of love for the planet and ALL things living on the planet! – to force those innocent and loving government officials to allow the greedy, evil, rich, oil field polluters to drill the fertile fields and pollute our unspoiled wilderness and kill Teddy Bears for their greedy monopoly of denier haters. And, no doubt, these same evil deniers who hate and pollute will be white Christian homo-phobic capitalist zealots who kill the dark man first, then the gay ecologist who studies butterflies, then the liberal college professor who can prove the world is round and was created 14 billions years ago …
        Now, who will be correct?

      • Controversial? You mean like “Wilfred”?

        “Not every politician is thrilled. Sen. Steve Fielding of the Family First Party said edgy comedy wasn’t the best government expenditure: “I don’t think taxpayers’ money should be used to finance film projects that display acts of bestiality.” Ya think?
        [Disgusting description with four letter words follows, caution]
        The headline of this story was “Plenty of bong for your buck.” The name of this TV show is “Wilfred,” which we’re told is “also peppered with profanity, full-frontal nudity and jokes about rape.” The plot centers on a woman named Sarah, her boyfriend, Adam, and her dog, Wilfred — who’s actually a man with a three-day beard in a dog suit and a painted-on black nose.
        The dog “chain-smokes and talks about his penchant for having sex with dead animals, a stuffed bear and the neighbor’s cat.” It’s edgy enough that the dog makes jokes about the healing magic of licking his own rear end. The first episode of the second season, which airs at 10 p.m. on Monday nights, featured 35 swear words, including the especially line-crossing C-word for females.
        So how do the feds in Australia defend funding this garbage? Pretty much the same way they do it in the States, it turns out.
        Jane McMillan, a spokeswoman for the SBS network, which runs the naughty-doggie comedy, unfurled a series of lame rationalizations about how it was admittedly “not a show for everyone,” but nevertheless was a justified recipient of government backing. Consider these empty arguments:”

        read the rest here:
        Ah, Canberra. Plenty of bong for your buck. Controversial publicly funded art. Drugged kids reading “Kill Climate Deni9rs” posters and ads. Also, parents should keep in mind, that under the UN’s Convention for the Rights of a Child treaty, which Australia signed and ratified, children have a “right to cultural experiences,” even if their parents object. I am guessing this may be a public school field trip destination, but time will tell.

    • Agreed, there’s a good chance it’s about the absurdity of Green nutterism. I give it 30% that it is. We need investigative reporting by a local person, anybody there?

      • Ah, I see below that they are Green nutters. Definitely shouldn’t be funded by government. I thought Abbott was PM?

  10. They made a movie about assassinating President Bush! But sneeze at a picture of Obama and you are charged with treason.
    Bolt is right. The hate exudes from the left, and they no longer feel a need to hide it.

    • Desperate people are use desperate tactics…
      Let’s remember the film made by the 10:10 UK environmental movement showing a teacher urging her class of 13 year olds to use efficient light bulbs and reduce air and car travel. Two students, Phillip and Tracy, are hostile. “No pressure,” says the teacher, who presses a button which explodes both of the children, showering classmates with blood and flesh and reducing Phillip and Tracy to red puddles.
      Desperate people are using desperate tactics.
      Synchronicity? – or maybe agenda?

  11. Kind of an empty threat since there isn’t anyone claiming the climate doesn’t change, isn’t it?
    Or, are they “labelling” people first, then killing them, and then finding out what the person’s opinion was?

  12. 2 responses to this:
    1. “The Left is the natural home of the modern totalitarian”. Wrong. Extremes in many areas including politics (far left and far right) and religion (ISIS) can be overtly totalitarian. ISIS are fascists whose methods would be recognised by the Nazis.
    2. As someone who is convinced that the planet is warming due to increases in GHG concentrations (though there is a debate about how much), I am happy to condemn people who use art as an excuse for calls to violence against sceptics or anyone else. There is more than enough violence in the world as it is.

    • You’re preaching to the choir here when you say:
      “I am happy to condemn people who use art as an excuse for calls to violence against sceptics or anyone else. There is more than enough violence in the world as it is.”
      Go on some climate alarmists blogs and tell them the same thing.
      They’ll probably want to kill you, too.

    • But why are you convinced of the cause of something that isn’t even happening ??
      What kind of logical absurdity is that ??

    • Not only is “the Left the natural home home of the modern totalitarian” but further, “the Modern Totalitarian is the natural home of the left”. Not exclusive, but natural.

      • “…the Nazis were Left Wing. The name means “National Socialists”
        It’s an argument I used to make. I’m just about to finish reading the second volume of Mein Kampf. It’s been a gruelling read – dreary, poorly written and mostly one long extended anti semitic rant, but every so often one sees the very soul of Nazi ideology laid bare. The Nazis may have appropriated the ‘socialist’ monicker but in truth they were militaristic fascist corporatists; hateful of Marxism (‘ the Jewish conspiracy’), enemies of communism and violently individualistic. There was nothing ‘socialist’ about them except the name. They tolerated the trade unions (for a while) out of expediency until 1933 when absolute power allowed them to dispense with them completely.
        Hitler rails against ‘capitalists’ but only in the context of ‘Jewish capitalists’ – to him there is no other kind of capitalist in the decadent nations of between-the-wars Europe and America. The Jews are to blame for everything. His distrust of capitalism had nothing at all to do with any sense of socialist sympathies; he simply wanted to reinvent aggressive corporatism in Nazi Germany ‘free’ from the Jewish yoke.
        And so on.

      • statism=socialism. Authoritarian=statist. Nazi’s = Left wing.
        You cant argue that Nazi’s were right wing free market capitalist libertarians. It’s nonsensical.

        • At 6:18 AM on 1 October, william had written:

          statism=socialism. Authoritarian=statist. Nazi’s = Left wing.
          You cant argue that Nazi’s were right wing free market capitalist libertarians. It’s nonsensical.

          Using the convention of equation in this context is writhingly inappropriate, but your observation that the National Socialist German Workers’ Party (NSDAP) was left-socialist is altogether correct, no matter how much our modern “Liberal” fascist parlor pinkos hate to hear it.
          It’s less parsimonious but more precise to state that socialism is necessarily statist (for government is the engine of enforcement, the “breaking things and killing people” machinery for coercing obedience among those who reject the socialists’ claims upon their lives, their liberties, and their property), that all authoritarians must be statist (whatever their nominal motivation, whether it’s allegedly “social justice” or “race purity” or “the dictatorship of the proletariat”), and that the NSDAP government of Germany and the territories taken under their control by Anschluss or treaty or conquest had been socialist in purpose, policy, and procedure from beginning to end. By way of Albert Speer’s recollection of remarks made by his boss:
          “I had only to develop logically what social democracy failed…. National Socialism is what Marxism might have been if it could have broken its absurd ties with a democratic order…. Why need we trouble to socialize banks and factories? We socialize human beings….”
          Mayhap the more pungent Americanism will do, too?
          “When you’ve got ’em by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow.”

      • Few would accuse Hitler of being a clear and concise thinker on the philosophy of Fascism. The Italian model under Mussolini was better thought out. In his book “Liberal Fascism” Jonah Goldberg points out the parallels between modern liberalism and Fascism of the 20s and 30s. A play about killing deniers only reinforces this point

      • william,
        Right Wing =/= libertarian. Libertarian =/= conservative. You’re looking at this as just left vs right when there’s also up (authoritarian) vs down (libertarian). The Nazis were, in fact, right wing, unlike socialists. Like socialists, however, they WERE authoritarian.

      • the differences between Nazis and communists was nationalism vs globalism and who owned the means of production that were controlled by the state. The nationalism vs globalism was not much of a difference because both really wanted global control anyway. Both were leftwing extremists by the simple definition that left of the chart of how much government is the most. The rightwing extremists are actually libertarian/anarchists who want no government which leads to the power vacuum usually filled by a new tyranny. conservatives are actually centrist/right. As for fascism – that is the unholy trinity of big government, big labor, and big government protected corporations – all controlled by government.
        Statism is a usurped word from the past indicating a fealty to a continuing government rather than to the particular king currently in charge. It used to be safe to use that to refer to those who believe in an all powerful government. That is getting to be no longer the case as there is a rise in the cult of personality amongst the left and maybe others who seem to be returning to this fealty to the king and the king’s heirs rather than to a perpetual continuing government headed by a king.
        Capitalsm is really simply the free market. Everyone has capital equipment, starting back with flint knives and axe heads. The free market is the natural state of exchange as opposed to a controlled market – a monopoly which requires government assistance to maintain. Things are optimal when there is a free market and suboptimal when the market is distorted by government to produce some sort of desired result by placing restrictions on people and their efforts.

    • James Abbott
      September 30, 2014 at 4:54 pm
      “2 responses to this:
      1. “The Left is the natural home of the modern totalitarian”. Wrong. Extremes in many areas including politics (far left and far right) and religion (ISIS) can be overtly totalitarian. ISIS are fascists whose methods would be recognised by the Nazis. ”
      Now explain the differences between “extreme Left”, and “extreme Right”, and why we give them two different names…
      (Hint, look into Mussolini’s party program)

    • Everything to the right of Communism is “right-wing”
      “Far right” is actually Classical Liberalism. Look it up.
      As for ISIS. You make the tired old mistake of conflating Islam with Christianity. That’s like saying Mohammad and Jesus taught the same things. Absurd.

  13. I’ve had people call me a climate denier simply because I showed them a plot of global average temperatures on a scale where you can actually see the trend over the last 20 years, instead of a scale of over 100 years. I didn’t realize some people think the penalty for showing data should be death.

    • I’ve been called a denier for saying that the empirical evidence was increasingly supporting the idea that transient climate sensitivity was lower than previously thought.

      • dbstealey:
        These were true believers who tolerated no deviation from scripture. Anyone who said “I agree with much of what you say, but catastrophe is not imminent or as inevitable as you make out” was assumed to be a concern troll, a denier in sheep’s clothing.

  14. Haven’t quite got those twin desires for universal peace and human butchery completely sorted out, as of yet. Fortunately these guys couldn’t successfully attack a weakened chipmunk.With a axe.

  15. I am an Australian citizen so I have started making some calls and emails about it. I am being polite but firm about the offense of the title. I know this game so I am seeking clarification and trying to obtain the application of the grant to see what the play intends.
    Emailed the Aspen Island Theatre Company asking for clarification about the play and tried ringing the ArtsACT but went to their messagebank (or so I think). I will ring later to try and get more details from ArtsACT. If they do not give up anything I will pursue a FOI on the application. Public money so the details of applications and approval should be fully public.
    Also emailing the Minister for the Arts, Joy Bruch. I do not expect much from this angle as she is a ALP member (left wing for non Australians).
    Watch this space!

  16. They’re Australian. Totally harmless. The only thing Australians have killed recently is a reduction in coal exports. Go Oz!

  17. It gets tiresome after awhile. If progressives are going to come for me with pitchforks and torches, get on with it I say. Better that they just get over it, cause such violence would profit nobody, but if they’re coming for me bring it on already. Either that or shut up about it.

    • They have regulations and selective law enforcement, not torches or pitchforks. They are getting on with it as I type.
      Think about what we have seen with the DOJ, EPA, IRS, and on and on.
      There is most definitly a pattern in play with appointed, not elected, officials in charge, and they are most definitly getting on with it.
      Regards, Ed

      • Thanks Ed. Two can (and presumably do) play at that particular game though, something the good ‘ole boys from my neck of the woods are infamous for. Still, something to think about.

    • Mark,
      They don’t have the stomach….or dangling bits below… for a face-on fight. They never have. They are and always have been the midnight ‘monkey wrenchers’ of logging equipment and middle of the night sneak attackers on fur farms, game ranches, and plant genetic research facilities. They are the ones that threaten “We know where you live…”. Their actions show they are cowards first.
      Why does M. Mann choose a venue with the speakers podium significantly separated from the audience, present no new data, and uses a hardcore supporter to personally choose who can ask ‘appropriate questions’ during a very brief Q&A? They are cowards.
      Why won’t the ‘climate experts’ and ‘peer reviewed authors’ of catastrophic global warming alarmist papers engage in open debate with experts of opposing perspectives and an unbiased moderator? They are cowards.
      Why won’t they even acknowledge and discuss like rational human beings 18 years of essentially no global warming trend? What is looking more like a sinusoidal temperature trend regardless of the steadily increasing CO2 trend? No ‘signature’ heating of the upper atmosphere? Or their baseless assertions of ‘the oceans ate the missing heat’? They are cowards.
      Why do they attempt to incite imprisonment and murder of those who fairly oppose them in the open market of ‘hypothesis, test, and fully disclose your results’ science? They are cowards.
      These cowards know they’d get their asses kicked into the ash heaps of history in a ‘stand up’ fight…. so they play the covert strategy of ‘death by a thousand small cuts’. As such, we have to confront them at all levels to assure facts and hard data win out over their progressively failed dogma and increasingly radicalized and ludicrous assertions.
      All the best to you, Mark!

  18. I left the following comment on their contact page – I doubt it will pass moderation.
    “I’m seriously disturbed by news that your organisation is going to be involved in a theatrical production “kill climate deniers”. As a regular guest author on http://wattsupwiththat.com I am a target for hate speech from those who think I am a “climate denier”.
    A government sponsored project which might encourage such divisive barbarity and possible threats to my safety and the safety of my family is utterly abhorrent. I’m sure I don’t need to draw your attention to the historical precedent.”

  19. Agree with Pat. We don’t know what it’s about yet. They describe the island as “mounted by an imperial organ”. It might turn out to be a wry exposition of crowd mentality and populist dogma

  20. The following link (intentionally lacking a (t)) htp://killclimatedeniers.tumblr.com/ has information about these loons including a disclaimer they don’t want to encourage anyone to kill deniers ‘either by shooting (,) drowning or hanging.’ This has to be hate speech and some Aussie needs to push it.

    • “they don’t want to encourage anyone to kill deniers ‘either by shooting (,) drowning or hanging.”
      So I guess that other ways to kill deniers is OK then. Perhaps running over with cars, or poison,
      or arrows, or knives, or bombs might be OK. Maybe they intend to draw and quarter, or even
      drag deniers behind trucks/cars going down the road. How about train tracks?
      Somehow that limited denial (shooting, drowning, hanging) is not at all comforting.

  21. I don’t write often … but should not we just put together a “kill the Climate Liars” theatre project? Its certain that between us all, there is a lot of fodder for the script.

  22. Killclimatedeniers.tumblr.com is a website and the same phrase has a twitter account. Its a completely ignorant website, nothing that will educate anyone, no data on climate or temperatures, just a lot of words about how bad climate change is without anything backing up any claims.
    On the website, on the “about” page, it says lots of guns will be needed to stop climate change, and this:
    “So this show (tentatively called Kill Climate Deniers because why not) takes this form: a group of heavily armed eco-activists break into a major Australian institution and hold the occupants hostage. Their demands are: a complete sessation of all carbon emissions, immediately, and the immediate transformation of the Australian economy away from any and all reliance on fossil fuels. Immediately.”

  23. The Australian drought ended, so who are the deniers? I rather think those down under should be happy that the warmists are wrong.

  24. Just sent off an email to the leader of the opposition in the ACT. No point in complaining to the apparatchiks who approved this.
    Some may think we should wait until we know more about the play. I don’t think that it will be a comedy. The title is what sells. I doubt it would be funded if it was called ‘Kill the Jews’ or ‘Kill the Blacks.’

  25. Once wrapped in the magical Cloak of Morality, there is no deed too evil to be rationalized from within it. But this isn’t a tool of the left or the right, it is a tool of the left AND the right. History abounds with that lesson.
    That said, I’d like to see a transcript of the play if anyone has one.

  26. When, if ever, will we see the reasonable and educated people in the warmer side of climate debate speak out against hateful garbage like this? What will it take?

    Bishop Hill touched on this recently as well, here.
    Is there a point when the silence of those who quietly admit that they know better in the face of the hype and madness incurs moral culpability? Perhaps not. Still, I have a hard time feeling anything but contempt towards such convenient cowardice.

    • The enviro-wackos are just like Islamists, aren’t they? The “good” ones will say they disapprove — if you corner them, and ask them in public.
      But they never step up in public and disapprove of these threats of violence on their own. What “green” group has distanced itself from RFK jr’s demand that skeptics should be jailed, or worse?
      I think the proper response is: *crickets*

  27. I believe it’s just a matter of (short) time before environmental movements turn violent, and very extreme at that. All ingredients are already there. McKibbenities, as crazy as they are in their environmental beliefs, have already enlisted extreme groups, such as anarchists, communists, Marxists and such, as observed at the “climate march”. These guys cause trouble everywhere they show up. And such “performances” just add fuel to the fire.

    • Hey, they do all the time; ALF, ELF, Mr. Froggies who held up that TV station, Joe Stack, the Unabomber…

    • I would not rule it out, as the so-called “pause” continues and their frustrations mount. They will blame skeptics for the failure of their program. It could get pretty nasty.

  28. How sad it is to see this behavior. It is telling of the moral decay in the US. I did not realize that immoral behavior was in the redistribution plan too!

  29. It looks to me like an Australian satirical piece. The Australians excel at satire which might be difficult to take for those who do not appreciate biting wit. Look at the ever popular TV series ‘The Games’ about settting up the administration for the Sydney Olympics of 2000. That was very rough unless you understand Australian wit but was an excellent satire. –From New Zealand . where they do satire of a rough kind too.

  30. Simply continuation of the stupid 10:10 video. We probably don’t have to wait longer anymore until one of these sickos attacks a so-called sceptic. Disgusting.

  31. I have to say that recent events like this in Australia are making me very nervous. I have a friend who is ex-military and he has been offering to teach me how to shoot for several years. I have always turned him down out of principle, but now I am not so sure.

    • What principle are you referring to?
      I don’t understand.
      Learning a skill such as driving a car, using a computer, or cooking as an example, are a good thing and not much different, even if you never have to use them.
      Just sayin….

      • Well as I see it there are three things you can do with a gun: Hunt – not my thing at all, Shoot someone – not my thing either (except perhaps in self defence) and shooting at targets, which might be fun for a while.

  32. {bold emphasis mine – JW}
    Andres Bolt wrote in Australia’s ‘Herald Sun’,
    The Left is the natural home of the modern totalitarian – and of all those who feel entitled by their superior morality to act as savages.
    How how the ACT Government justify spending taxpayers’ money on a theatre work entitled ”Kill Climate Deniers”?
    . . .
    What sane Government donates to a project urging others to kill fellow citizens, even as a “joke”? Are these people mad?”

    – – – – – – –
    By his use of “Left”, I understand that Andrew Bolt mean socialist parties in Australia. Can we extend that context to all the self-identying / self-named socialist parties in other modern industrialized countries as well? Are any of Australia’s socialist parties unique compared to socialist parties in other countries?
    Is there an underlying principle to it all?
    & it does not matter what a political party’s mass media PR says about itself or what it calls itself, rather, it is what ethical acts they actually carry out that is the fundamentally defining character of the party. If a political party carries out collectivism as a principle, it is socialist whether it calls itself socialist or not.
    & collectivism is a quasi-ethical principle and is also, at the same time, a quasi-political principle. It gives permission to sacrifice the liberty, property or life of one group of people to another group of people. WRT art, look for groups of people advocating collectivism and you should see in their art the portrayal of glorification of sacrificing others to their needs.

    • I’m afraid Aussie climateers have been in the news disproportionately to population. The ship of fools wasn’t the only item. The government has dealt the climate doom culture there a huge blow. They had a pretty free reign and scads of cash from a socialist government for a generation and this resulted in thousands of students enrolling in this lightly opposed discipline. Now they are desperate. A new mental illness pathology has sprung up in Australia and it will spread overseas, of course. That this kill the deniers play came out of Oz should not be surprising. I think we are getting a forecast of how this thing will pan out internationally from all this.

    • Gary Pearse on September 30, 2014 at 7:16 pm
      – – – – – – – – –
      Gary Pearse,
      So, had Michael Crichton lived until now he probably would have written ‘State of Fear Downunder’ to capture the essence of Australian climate fear mongering which would complement his original ‘State of Fear’ which was basically set in the United States.

  33. This is not a laughing matter at all. The doctrinaire climateers are desperate, depressed at the hiatus and lack of action on CO2 – there is a whole new mental illness playing out and some are displaying alarming symptoms. Ironically, a major symptom is denial!! They won’t let go of the floods and fire of CO2 cause.
    Listen, there are some Hinckleys out there that have had the rug pulled out from under them and with nothing to lose could be dangerous. The hot climate establishment’s silence on this is a measure of where and what these folks are. This in itself is the largest falsification of their work. They clearly are in stunned denial themselves. Note they are not publishing much, but rather are out showing the same old slides. The chances for ugly incidents are especially high in Australia – the whole climate culture and industry has had the rug pulled out from under them by the government. They are shriller than most. They see the massive redundancy in their discipline – Over several years I’ve warned would be climate scientist students (mining and oil exploration geology was going short of new blood with the massive enrollment in the geological sciences’ environmental courses in Australia and Canada -two major mining countries) to find something else because this one-trick-pony is overloaded with practioners and it was only a matter of time before they would have to seek something else.
    I think a telling count down would be to gather stats on enrollment in climate science at universities. Anyone got a source for this sort of thing. The failure of forecasts and frankly, the boredom there must be when there is basically only one formula to learn.

  34. *When, if ever, will we see the reasonable and educated people in the warmer side of climate debate speak out against hateful garbage like this?*
    Never. Because those “reasonable and educated people” you refer to secretly approve of such actions, though they are not brave — or stupid — enough to say so.
    The differences between those in The Cause are not philosophical, they are practical. Some will openly admit the Green/Left’s true extreme agenda; most will not, fearing a backlash. They don’t condemn projects like these, but they can’t publicly support them, so ……….. silence is the only option left.

  35. I’m disgusted beyond description. I used to call Canberra home; I lived in Gungahlin (Ngunnawal, specifically: the best part of the ACT outside of Tidbinbilla) and I truly love the ACT. The picture is of the Carillion Tower; you can see it on the Northwest coast of Lake Burley-Griffin, and you can hear it chime the hours if you sit by the water… The ACT is the only place in Australia where drug use (decriminalized marijuana) and prostitution are legal. We used to joke it was because of the presence of the politicians. We can blame the funding on drug-addled politicians, but they can’t carry sole blame for this nastiness.
    Yet even with the wonderful (sarc) reputation the ACT “enjoys” over things like decriminalized “green” and prostitution, I would think that the people and politicians who live in a place that throws the grandest Jazz and music Festivals in the world, the best gardening celebration anywhere (Floriade is simply glorious), and is simply one of the most beautiful cities on planet earth (with what I always thought of as people who matched), would say no to something as vile, as rude, as un-Australian as this. Pro-environment, yes, even to a pro-AGW fault—but tacit approval for senseless violence?
    This is lower than the original town of Acton, sunk beneath the lake this last century.

  36. Like everything the left does, silence sanity. No better example of lacking a coherent counterperspective. Typical.

  37. We could always put on a play of our own. In our play, we could imprison climate alarmists, because they are lying to the populace, in order to push their evil agenda….They are greedy, hateful carpetbaggers, trying to control everyone and everything on the earth, so that they can dominate over all citizens. They are convicted of committing treasonous acts, and sentenced to be strapped to the blade of a 600 ft wind turbine, till they come to their senses….if ever. Much better story line, anyway! LOL!

  38. Although I believe the theater company producing this play has every right to perform the play under Freedom of Speech, the government absolutely does not have the right to use taxpayer money to subsidize its production. Period! (TM).

  39. Be careful about premature conclusions… What if this turned out to be another Lewandowsky research experiment? (half sarcastic, half not)

    • Thanks. But eventually we need welfare for lackeys. We need a servant class. Like in the old days.

  40. So, they want to kill reality? Because that is their true enemy now. I guess putting them in a jar of urine just won’t do anymore. Gotta be edgy.

    • You mean my Mann dummy holding a hockey stick in a jar of boiling urine isn’t edgy enough to receive ACT funding? Darn!

      • You mean my Mann dummy holding a hockey stick in a jar of boiling urine isn’t edgy enough to receive ACT funding? Darn!

        Add to your grant request a plan to have your subject’s mannequin holding a cross-section slice of a genuine Yamal larch tree in his other hand, with the urine to have been solicited from Dr. Mann himself, and I think you could get the dough.
        Oh, yeah; instead of boiling the liquid, have carbon dioxide bubbling up through it.
        It ain’t just “edgy” you need, but authenticity.

  41. [SNIP! one of the ugliest most racist comments I’ve ever seen – you’ve been warned, now you are BANNED – PERMANENTLY All further comments from you will go immediately to the bit bucket – Anthony Watts]

  42. Stop giving them publicity. Don’t waste your emotion on a theatre company that can’t pay it’s own way without some government money. It’s a catchy title and you’re all being sucked in. I mean, who goes to live theatre anymore? I’ve been dragged to some of these events years ago. All I wanted to do was vomit while mixing with the latte set. Pooncing little shits that want to break into the ‘bigtime’. ‘I am an artiste’.
    Don’t give them any publicity and just laugh it off. They are irrelevant and no-one will see the show. Next year the idiots will be putting out their hand for a show called ‘The beheading of ISIS’ or some shit like that.

    • I kind of understand what you’re saying, but when government funds are being spent on this kind of trash, it’s time to speak up. To just “laugh it off” and do nothing is what they’re hoping you will do.

      • I would kinda leave it till the play comes out. It, in fact, may be satire. The whole spending of money on ‘The Arts’, I find abhorrent. 3 ppm neanderthal giving some special rights is also abhorrent. Government in Australia gives grants to sports, arts and other things.

    • You reckon no-one will see the show? I’ll be going for sure and now that it’s been well publicised there’ll be plenty of folks going who did not previously know about it!

  43. As someone on Bishop Hill pointed out, to identify if it’s hate speech or not, simply replace the subject with an equivalent.
    “kill the Aboriginese”
    “kill the Woman’s Libbers”
    “kill the Jews”
    Yep, it’s hate speech.

  44. It’s just a title.
    Now check to make sure that this isn’t a lewandowsky experiment.
    However as anythony points out even if the play is in jest… think the no pressure video, .. narratives have a mind of their own. In the cycle of drama we might start with tragedy and end in satire. Conversely if you enter a narrative cycle with comedy or satire the logic of genre will lead to telling tragic tales . This cycle is, some would argue,
    Built into us.

  45. I’m sure we’re getting all excited over nothing! It’s probably going to be an action satire like ‘Kill Bill’. Oh, wait…

  46. THere was a banner carried at the Climate paid volunteer pseudo-demonstration in NYC.
    It proclaimed that: “Capitalism is the cause,
    Socialism is the cure.”
    Last I looked China was not an environmentatal paradise, nor was Russia, N Korea or Cambodia.
    The truth is socialism in all its flavors from Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Kim Or PolPat are the only builders of the Auswitz and Gulag. Socialist control warps Science irregardless of whether its Genetics like Lysenko, or a perversion of Climate like CAGW and Pachauri’s IPCC.
    Every variety of Socialism from Nazi to Castroite has been a disaster for those for whom they supposedly speak. Except for the Party nouveau aristocrats, of course.
    LIncoln is said to have once forlornly mused, that you can’t change a slaveholder’s mind.
    The Slaver will continue believing in his right to own other human beings. You can kill him but you can’t change his mind.
    Socialism like Slavery is just another pure perversion.

  47. Well the term climate denier excludes everyone on WUWT because all readers and commenters here know that a climate exists, moreover they know it it changes over time, that temperatures rise and fall. Huge geological epochs testify to the wonder that is the climate of earth and the ability of life to flourish in adverse and optimum conditions. It has been both warmer and cooler then the present time. The debate here is scientific and open, ideas are expounded challenged, including that of man made carbon dioxide forcing, which may be a tad over egged by some parties.
    All here, I think, would like to reduce pollution, clean up the environment, reduce poverty and disease. All readers here seem to have a great love of this planet and an interest in science and a curiosity about the universe we inhabit. So I would be grateful if someone could explain what exactly are we in denial about?

    • That is true. People here do not have any love for “poverty and disease.”
      That is why we use fungicides, pesticides, and herbicides to control the more than 20,000 types of molds and mildews that are waiting to destroy our crops, and the hundreds of thousands of insects and weeds that make growing food nearly impossible.
      And to “reduce poverty and disease,” we also grow cattle for dairy and beef. The superior proteins provided by domestic animals keep people from becoming malnourished, and provide so much food for so little land, that it nearly eliminates the need for hunting, foraging, and continued deforestation. This preserves the wilderness as well as “reducing poverty and disease.”

  48. I often have conversations with Warmists where they display open hatred and hostility to me…I’m longing for the day when one of them is stupid enough to act out their aggression!

  49. As if, if they got their way, there would be any money available to dole out for community theatre projects. People would be struggling just to feed themselves.

  50. The man is a loon who probably howls at the full moon. Best ignored – as this just strikes me as being attention seeking. Therapy is needed to help him, I feel sorry for him being that angry all the time.

  51. philjourdan
    September 30, 2014 at 4:44 pm
    They made a movie about assassinating President Bush! But sneeze at a picture of Obama and you are charged with treason.
    Bolt is right. The hate exudes from the left, and they no longer feel a need to hide it.

    Prohibition is living breathing proof that the left is not the only side engaging in violent hate. And the Prohibitionists have the machinery of government on their side for now.

      • As soon as pot was legalized, libertarians moved the “prohibition” messaging to include the poor, persecuted heroin dealers in local neighborhoods, and the under-appreciated prostitutes who are still not wanted and arrested in our cities and towns. Our sheriff just busted a drug manufacturing house in a bad neighborhood. Reasons to celebrate are many, not the least of which perhaps it will stop some of the dealers from flooding the local high schools with heroin.
        As the Baby Boomers well know, and seem to be quite proud of showing the world, the sexual revolution was mainly possible because of the inhibition-lowering drugs. And of course, no matter what, the Hippy paradigm of sex and drugs can never fail, and never have negative results, and can never be said to have evil consequences. Because Prohibition.

        • At 12:58 PM on 1 October, from Zeke is gotten:

          As soon as pot was legalized, libertarians moved the “prohibition” messaging to include the poor, persecuted heroin dealers in local neighborhoods, and the under-appreciated prostitutes who are still not wanted and arrested in our cities and towns. Our sheriff just busted a drug manufacturing house in a bad neighborhood. Reasons to celebrate are many, not the least of which perhaps it will stop some of the dealers from flooding the local high schools with heroin.

          Contrary to the sphincter-clenching social conservative cant about libertarians opposing the War on (Some) Drugs – as well as the criminalization of sexual (as opposed to political) prostitution – to libertine purposes, the simple fact of the matter is that libertarians recognize that the highly Progressive “moral equivalent of war” against the lamentable appetites intrinsic to human nature tends with hideous reliability to constitute not a helluva lot more than a government price support program for the dope dealers and the preservation of pervasive corruption among “law-enforcement officers” of all sorts and levels.
          Not to mention making it extremely profitable for pimps and other “managers” of those women, boys, girls and young men reduced by force or desperation to selling their sexual services in the sordid and dangerous clandestine market the Progressives and other religious whackjobs have facilitated in our society.
          It might also be observed that, unlike these dogwhistle “moral” authoritarians, libertarians tend to be aware of the fact that Heroin – diacetylmorphine – had entered the marketplace as a branded pharmaceutical produced by Bayer (“Heroin” is in fact Bayer’s trademark name for the medication), and like morphine, meperidine, oxycodone, dihydromorphone and fentanyl it’s an opioid agonist of known utility in the management of pain, marked as a Schedule I drug – fantastically labelled by the legislators (overwhelmingly a bunch of goddam lawyers) as having “no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States and a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision” – for no reason supportable by way of pharmacology or physiology.
          Have any of these flaming idiot social conservatives grunted and groaned and thought about why the drug dealers have such incentives to push psychoactive chemicals among children and adolescents – to be “flooding the local high schools with heroin” – other than the fact that the present criminalization of manufacturing and selling such stuff enables the vendors to charge nosebleed-high prices for cheaply-made commodities of dubious quality?
          Oh, hell, no!

    • Drugs are not harmful to the brain, central nervous system, personal relationships, families, schools and towns because they are illegal.

      • Does any one here really think that all of the horrible physical, social, and psychological consequences of mj and heroin use, and prostitution, stem solely from the fact that it is illegal? You are just in denial.

  52. Hey! Talk about rush to judgment….
    107 comments already, mostly full of silly indignation. Anybody think it’s likely we are being spoofed?
    Seems to me we should check that this press notice is for real, first. But if this piece really does have that title, I would expect it to be a comedy or satire. If it was a serious enviro-piece I think it would have had a more subtle title.
    Then again, most theatrical folk are likely to be serious warmists (maybe S Lewandowsky is at this moment applying for a grant to investigate if this is true?) so maybe I am wrong. We’ll see.
    I’d be indignant, too, though, if I lived in ACT, and it was MY money that was supporting ANY theatre project, warmist or sceptical, left or right, tragedy or comedy.

  53. I have an intelligent &. creative play in mind titled “Kill Joy Marie Burch“, in which an angry mob is depicted, discontent with the fact the loving mother of a guy charged with aggravated robbery of a fast food restaurant poses as their Art Minister. In other words it would be pure fun. Where can I apply for an artsATC grant?

  54. I have been threatened both directly and indirectly more then once. Im not even the type to say that the theory IS wrong about dangerous levels of warming. Personally I think the idea of the C in C agw is completely un supported and wrong but really I just try to show people that the science is NOT settled, our understanding IS in major flux, and the C in C agw is certainly not a given or proven. Even when I make it very clear with published work that the field is still in flux and our understanding of most variables is far from certain I STILL am often told it is a problem to ask questions, the experts do this for us! I see this as a very dangerous mindset no matter the issue but especially when its being used to force global compliance.

    • Good post,, however one thought to add. The benefits of CO2 are KNOWN in hundreds of studies, in thousands of experiments, and in observations. The “C” in CAGW is clearly absent in the observations. Hell, the “G” and the “W” are all absent for well over 15 years now. In fact the G, like the C never happened,

  55. I’m going to stick my neck out here and say – let them perform their play.
    Just because I don’t like it and even threatened by it doesn’t mean I should muzzle them. They aren’t in a position of power to start a pogrom. So give then their right to free speech.
    (And I suspect it’s a spoof of Richard Curtis’s red button short).

    • “(And I suspect it’s a spoof of Richard Curtis’s red button short).”
      I don’t think so. The Alarmists have buried that attempt at humor (yes – they made it because they thought it would be hilarious). NOBODY talks about it anymore but the skeptics. Ordinary people not interested in the climate snorefest have never heard of it.
      Nobody spoofes something nobody has heard of.
      So I guess this play is another terribly misguided attempt at humor by liberal arts majors who think they can write a piece.

    • Tend to agree. And the 10:10 outing really didn’t serve the narrative quite as intended.
      Next up… a reprise of the 10:10 video, told via the medium of dance (if there’s an opera on the Klinghoffer murder anything is possible in artistic expression). Seems the BBC and Guardian have had to charter an entire A380 just to accommodate essential staff to attend. Apparently (this means anything can mean anything if added somewhere in the text. Apparently).
      Their reviews would be a hoot. The Graun had to pull its 10:10 CiF page crowing about their support when the comments hit about 100:1 disgusted, and mostly loyal Ciffers unclear on what was being served with this effort.
      The BBC then reported this as ‘views being split’. Typical BBC; it was semantically accurate but in every other way professionally dishonest.

    • I agree. The descriptions of this play seem no worse than standard Hollywood fare. For instance, the US TV network SHOWTIME has produced entire series devoted to such topics as the lives of prostitutes, dope dealers, serial killers and combinations of same. The things that are glorified by the arts and entertainment industry… no wonder there seems to be a cultural and moral void.

  56. How can you judge a play before you’ve seen it, or at least seen a summary of its content? The title could mean all kinds of things, it could be irony or sarcasm. Has someone actually tried to ask the writers before publishing this criticism?

    • Oh yeah, nah, they would never mean it seriously, just look at the MULTIPLE layers of IRONY in the 10:10 child-sploding video; so many it looks like a Lasagne and we have to wind our post-modern brains around it for as long as it takes to sip a Chardonnay while making thoughtful gestures with our nerd-glasses. Yet again, how refreshing is the thought that we confused the enemy with the pretense of multiple layers of irony and actually managed to use taxpayer money to produce a blatant in-your-face piece of genocidal agitprop, ah the good old days, the 1920ies in Moscow, the days before the comrades cracked down on the progressive artists… Well let’s switch to Vodka, the night is young.

  57. I followed the link to the ‘contact’ page and ended up at what suspiciously looked to be a wordpress comment form. So I left the following comment:

    “Kill Climate Deniers?
    What is so sad about this awful use of taxpayer funds is that virtually no-one denies climate.
    But the catastrophic alarmists love to claim people deny climate and they promptly label anyone who disagrees with the catastrophic meme’s increasingly illogical faith system as a denier. No reasons are needed, just ask a question they don’t like.
    Then along comes Aspen Island seeking to earn blood money for helping demean and belittle people.
    Perhaps your resident catastrophic expert should check out a temperature chart and a CO2 atmospheric content chart next to each other.
    Temperature rise does not match CO2 rise; nor does it match the hundreds of model run’s predictions.
    If not now, when and why? (Currently there are 52 proposed reasons and counting, none are verified).”

    Posted, right into moderation.
    Then I hunted around some, if there is a comment form surely there is a list of comments… No, only empty space.
    It is unlikely that any of our comments are ever going to see screen time.

  58. Amazing , If we catch a Muslim preacher encouraging killing we would have him removed from the country.
    I guess the Preacher could now go to court and his defense ask whether he is doing anything different to the Theatre production.

  59. In fiction genres the portrayals of two human activities are dominant: sex and killing. Ho-hum.
    At issue is what is the ethical and cultural message intended by the authors of the proposed play entitled “Kill Climate Deniers”.
    If the play is intended to spread even just the slightest innocent-seeming cultural suggestion that it is reasonable to consider whether there is a need to have the government or some vigilantes do something about ‘climate deniers’ then I think the play should be intellectually denounced.

  60. If I was to write a play and wanted the world to notice it.
    Do you think calling it by some contentious name.
    Would work?

  61. According to their web page:
    “The scenario of the work sees an Australian environment minister confront an armed siege of the Australian Parliament by a group of eco-terrorists.”
    Assuming the eco-terrorists are climate alarmists looking to kill climate “deniers”, I would assume the scenario will actually denounce it’s very title.
    So I don’t know… maybe you guys are jumping the gun a little, getting all worked up over the container while ignoring the content…
    Did you even try tp contact them before totally flying off the handles?

    • No, I personally did not contact them. All I could think of were examples of hate speech I’ve seen from people in the climate fearosphere, in past, Just within the past 2 weeks, we have seen a speech from a US politician (John F. Kennedy, Jr.) calling for the imprisonment of the unfaithful and video statements from the true believers calling for burning down people’s houses and shaming and intimidating children.
      We’ve also witnessed US college professors stating that our viewpoints are a mental illness and we must be institutionalized and/or re-educated. There are many such examples…

  62. Some have remarked on the fact that this is merely the title and we don’t know what the play is. Just so.
    I don’t care why they decided on ‘kill climate deniers’. Knowingly or unknowingly, they made a bad call, because as we all know it is not unheard of for supposedly intelligent, educated members of our society to call for our deaths with perfect seriousness. So, it doesn’t work. Maybe you can title a play ‘date raping Senators’ and that’s OK, you can’t title a play ‘date raping white girls’, because that actually happens and is a problem.
    As always, just my view.

  63. If you bother to go to the website and click on ‘kill the deniers’ you will see that the ‘play’ is about a group of eco terrorists who besiege the Australian Parliament. So the theatre group is not advocating killing us deniers but is about eco fascists who wish to do so.

  64. The pathetic sociopath promoting this bit of trash, on his own blog, wants to impose his cliamte final solution with lots of guns. He fantasizes about a Chechen terorist attack style assault on a major theater or social event. He wants to take hostages and hold their lives in peril until he gets a total cessation of carbon emissions.

    • Hmmm… some people might list “Eco-terrorist” as a positive on their resume. The satirical point of this play may be that the Government gives the order to “Kill the climate deniers,” meaning the eco-terrorists.

  65. The facebook page summarizes:
    The scenario of the work sees an Australian environment minister confront an armed siege of the Australian Parliament by a group of eco-terrorists. In our application for funding to develop the piece, we made clear and explicit that through this scenario we in no way encourage or endorse those actions. It is a fictional scenario, and we take as given a common understanding that to depict something does not mean to condone it.
    More information is needed before outrage should be dispensed.

    • The Other Phil on October 1, 2014 at 7:31 am
      – – – – – – –
      You quoted the theatre group’s facebook page,
      {bold emphasis mine – JW}
      The [theatrre group’s] facebook page summarizes:
      “The scenario of the work sees an Australian environment minister confront an armed siege of the Australian Parliament by a group of eco-terrorists. In our application for funding to develop the piece, we made clear and explicit that through this scenario we in no way encourage or endorse those actions. It is a fictional scenario, and we take as given a common understanding that to depict something does not mean to condone it. ”
      Standard legal type disclaimer stuff.
      & but now the rest of the considerations . . . .
      & . . . when asked if the play will induce despairing and emotionally compromised copycat extremists to re-enact the play will the play’s authors, with a straight face, say “We hope not” while crossing their fingers?

    • In our application for funding to develop the piece, we made clear and explicit [wink] that through this scenario we in no way encourage [wink] or endorse those actions [wink] [wink]. It is a fictional scenario, and we take as given [wink] a common understanding [wink] [wink] that to depict something does not [wink] mean to condone it [wink] [wink] [wink]

  66. But ArtsACT director David Whitney said the authors had explicitly stated in their application they did not advocate or believe in violence of any kind, including for political reasons.

    Sooooooo. If I were global warming nutjob I will first look for their application form before killing. Very smart these folks.

  67. $18,793 of OPM (Other People’s Money). They couldn’t raise that kind of chump-change from a few wealthy Patrons of the Arts? They had to get a handout from the taxpayers? I think the play will be abhorrent in more ways than the one we’re thinking. Someone needs to take a head count at the beginning and at the end of the play.
    And BTW, whatever happened to that fine old tradition of bringing rotten vegetables to the theater just in case the production was rotten? I’m all for upholding tradition and that’s one tradition that should be upheld.

  68. For those trying to re-write history and sticking to the line that “the violence is all on the left”, I would say don’t look at what extremist groups use for titles, or their manifestos, or the clothes they wear, etc.
    Look at what they do.
    In that sense there is very little difference between the far extremes of left and right or extremes of religiously controlled states or regions.
    Characteristics include:
    Fascist rule with dissent crushed, including murder;
    Genocide of groups deemed to be a threat or “sub-human”;
    Concentration camps;
    Banning of elections;
    Seeking links with like-minded groups and authorities.
    So on the left and right we have (amongst many others):
    The Nazis (right)
    ISIS (right)
    The Japanese Imperialists (right)
    The Khmer Rouge (left)
    Stalin’s USSR (left)
    The claim the Nazis were left wing is ludicrous. The Nazis were major rivals to the communists in the early days of the development of the Hitler cult – they fought running battles on the streets. Communists were locked up or murdered under Hitler. Hitler chose pacts with fascist Japan and fascist Italy and invaded the USSR both to gain more territory and because he hated communism and viewed the soviets as sub-human.

      • The reason we call pre-war Germany leftist is because of the policies:
        Gun registry; gun seizure; eugenics/population control; extensive food card programs; government control of means of production; nationalization of the schools; just to name a few.
        These are progressive causes to this day, and are antithetical to individual liberties and free market. It’s all about policies, not labels.

    • James Abbott
      October 1, 2014 at 7:48 am
      “The claim the Nazis were left wing is ludicrous. The Nazis were major rivals to the communists in the early days of the development of the Hitler cult – they fought running battles on the streets.”
      Little wonder. Commies and Nazis competed for the same voters.
      Hitler and Stalin later became best buddies (for a while). Nazis visited Moscow, were received as friends, and got the Gulag camp plans.
      Hitler once said, he admired the commies for their fighting will; the social democrats for their care for the little guy, but had nothing but disdain for the bourgeoisie (which is French for citizens).
      Go figure.

  69. Strange how they used the term ” denier” which relates skeptics to events from the past ( though the alarmists say this was never the intention) and then went on to make videos featuring murder and called for killing/ locking up of deniers. Something deeply disturbing about all this.

  70. “Floating queerly and musically at the heart of the national capital is Aspen Island.”
    The island floats queerly. Some islands are now gay. We are dealing with complete nutjobs.

  71. Consider the case where the reason ‘they’*** are consistently looking like malevolent fanatics, with unhealthy fixations on imagining harm to anyone critical of the myth of dangerous climate change, is that they have total intolerance of independently created new ideas that are based on premises different than their own; they hate freedom of thought.
    & they fear their belief oriented premises won’t withstand applied reasoning based premises. There fears have been confirmed by skeptic’s arguments, that is, their premises can’t withstand alternate reason based premises.
    *** ‘they’ being those supporting complete faith in the pre-scientific mythic story that a crusade, a horrifically bloody one if necessary, is needed to save the earth from fossil fuel created CO2

  72. The problem with a consensus is that nobody within the group will speak out against hate speech such as this.
    More importantly, nobody will criticize the errors, or people speaking utter garbage who belong to the same group. Neither will they speak out in support of worthy comments made by people outside the group.
    You find the same in politics. It is a very human trait. But such intolerance in the past we now look down upon.

  73. I get the feeling some liberals without much money feel like they have been victimized by capitalism, they are blaming others for their failures by picturing themselves as slaves of the system, they have almost nothing while others have much more and they want to level the playing field for themselves by burning the plantation.
    This type of extreme liberal likes the idea of immediate, drastic action on climate change, like the “Kill Climate Deniers” story plot of forcing the immediate cessation of all fossil fuel use, to effectively burn the plantation and erase the advantages others have gained over them. They make themselves feel and sound like good people for believing this by dismissing the economic catastrophe that their proposed actions would cause under the excuse that it will prevent even worse consequences from climate disaster in the future for our children. We must destroy rich people to save the planet and our children.
    So the proposal of drastic, immediate, economic upheaval action on climate change is appealing on several levels to the worst of the liberals, it would bring down “big oil”, make rich people lose a lot of money, and make themselves feel courageous and like heroes for leading the planet saving action. And if you feel like you are a victim of capitalism then you probably have relatively little to lose if the economy collapsed, and a collapse forced to “save the children” would bring meaning to their disappointing lives and punish wealthier people who have obviously not lived by their superior liberal ideals.
    And if they were wrong about global warming being a problem we need to act on? So what, they got what they wanted from their actions, they made the economic playing field more level by bringing down those they hate and they now have an excuse for their own sorry situation in life, they sacrificed a better life (others will think they gave up a lot) to save the planet with their heroic actions. So don’t discuss the science aspect with them, they don’t want to know what the right thing to do is, they just want an excuse to burn the plantation.

  74. Under Kill Climate Deniers the AITC posts:

    AITC has received funding through the ACT Government Arts Fund for a two week creative development of Kill Climate Deniers, written by David Finnigan and directed by Julian Hobba.
    The creative development of the script, which is currently in draft form, will take place in January and February 2015.
    The scenario of the work sees an Australian environment minister confront an armed siege of the Australian Parliament by a group of eco-terrorists. In our application for funding to develop the piece, we made clear and explicit that through this scenario we in no way encourage or endorse those actions. It is a fictional scenario, and we take as given a common understanding that to depict something does not mean to condone it.
    An idea, or scenario, can be treated in many ways. It is premature to judge the way our production – which we hope to follow our creative development – will do this. Our application for funding describes that we will explore the idea through a satirical exploration of the tropes of the hostage-crisis action film genre.
    While we make no apologies for being urgently interested in the politics of climate change in Australia, the title of the piece points to the hyperbolic nature of the fictional scenario. This is not uncommon in the titles of plays or films. We hope, in time, to be judged not on the title of the work, but its content, and not on the notion of the idea at the centre of the work, but its treatment.
    For those interested, we will report back on the creative development early next year.

    While depicting does not condone, it does put ideas in people’s heads that they may emulate. e.g., See current ISIS activities!
    I find the title equivalent to the “rational” French Revolution’s resorting to the guillotine. Because of that “Noble Cause Corruption”, the

    guillotine did a notoriously brisk business during the Reign of Terror 1793-1794. According to guillotine replica site Bois de Justice, “It is estimated that over 10,000 people lost their heads to the slanted blade in those two years. Lesser and lesser crimes became punishable by death as the struggling Revolutionary Government attempted to quell internal unrest while fighting a war against all the other European nations.” . . .
    Perhaps most ironically and fittingly, Maximilien de Robespierre, who had been responsible for sending many to the guillotine, was guillotined on July 1794.

    I recommend submitting“Pre-Editorial” comments helping them to direct their “creativity!

    • Explore the idea.
      What does that mean anyway? Makes me think of the ‘more cowbell’ skit on SNL, explore the space…
      How many complicated layers of B.S. get applied here? Am I supposed to pretend to believe that these guys are ‘urgently interested’ in the politics of climate change in Australia, and while they happen not to be on the denier side, their work Kill Climate Deniers has nothing in fact to do with killing climate deniers, even though eco terrorists and hostages will be part of the exploration of the idea, via this satirical journey through the tropes of psychobabble? What if I don’t want to pretend that?
      Wish they’d cut the crap. At least Parncutt spoke in a clear and forthright manner. If they don’t even have the balls to stand openly by their message why utter the message at all? Or is Art the last refuge of the gutless?

  75. I am an amateur photographer who sells some photos online, at arts fairs, from local restaurants, etc. I have had great encouragement from very creative and artistic people that I have an “eye”. I don’t, however, have the pretentiousness that goes with modern art (as I, luckily, do not have an arts degree). Hence, my amateur status will probably remain active for the rest of my life. No grants heading my way. Still, I do need to spice up some of my bios and descriptions.
    Luckily, I found these:
    I actually do use them, and the scary thing is I don’t have to edit them much.

  76. Anyone recalling “Death of a President” (Bush assassination-chic) or deviant Warmists’ “No Pressure” 10/10 video some years ago will recognize the Brownshirt/Red Armband nature of these infantile-regressive, sociopathic Luddite Fetalists.
    Rattlesnakes coiled on my front porch face decapitation with a shovel, no questions asked. So let it be with these degraded necrophiliacs.

  77. Now a full-blown religion, complete with apostasy charges and fatwas. Congrats to the hockey teamers for turning climate science into a form of militant extremism. I am sure history will be kind to you.

  78. Aspen Island Theatre Company doesn’t have a separate existence from this grant.
    The same small group of marxist scroungers and rentseekers use similar criminal front tactics to Australian unions to trouser several different grants.
    This isn’t just a climate change related scam, it’s indicative of how the corrupt and incompetent equivalent of a lord mayor and council, masquerading as a territorial administration, grossly mismanages huge sums of money.
    The ACT is a corruptocracy. It bears scrutiny.

  79. First of all they have to find the climate deniers. I don’t know of any. surely no one denies the ‘climate’? but if they mean climate ‘change’ deniers I don’t know any of them either. surely no one denies the climate changes? maybe they mean global warming deniers? I don’t know any of them either. we know that humans do contribute some warming but its lost in the noise and is most likely inconsequential. so reading between the lines it comes down to just killing people who disagree with the hypothesis that human CO2 emissions are causing catastrophic ‘global’ warming. there are plenty of them but I think if a war starts a lot of eco-activists will be killed first … that’s just my opinion.

Comments are closed.