Another call to arrest climate "deniers"

They believe people should be punished for being climate skeptics
They believe people should be punished for being climate skeptics.

Adam Weinstein, of the Gawker, has added his voice to the growing list of greens, who demand a brutal authoritarian response to the vexing problem of people who have a different opinion.

According to Weinstein;

Man-made climate change happens. Man-made climate change kills a lot of people. It’s going to kill a lot more. We have laws on the books to punish anyone whose lies contribute to people’s deaths. It’s time to punish the climate-change liars.

This is an argument that’s just being discussed seriously in some circles. It was laid out earlier this month, with all the appropriate caveats, by Lawrence Torcello, a philosophy professor at the Rochester Institute of Technology.

Read More: http://gawker.com/arrest-climate-change-deniers-1553719888

Weinstein bases his claim that man made climate change “kills a lot of people” on a WHO page, which estimates that 150,000 people per annum are dying because of climate related extreme weather and other problems, such as crop failure.

However, this claim simply doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. Even the IPCC has failed to establish a link between CO2 and extreme weather. In addition, the rise in CO2 has so far been strongly beneficial for crop yields – satellites have detected a substantial greening of the planet, thanks largely to the fertilisation effect of the rise in atmospheric CO2.

In recent years we have all seen a worrying surge of hate speech against climate skeptics, and a disturbing level of political acquiescence in the face of murderous fantasy and intolerance. These incidents include a government sponsored celebration of climate murder in a theatre production, MSM cartoons celebrating political violence, more cartoons, proposals for soviet style forced “reeducation”, calls for the death penalty, calls for “deniers” to be jailed, wishes for divine retribution against “deniers”, the gruesome 10:10 video fantasy about murdering the children of “deniers”, and prominent environmentalist David Suzuki’s repeated calls for “deniers” to be jailed, here, and here. There have been far too many threats against the liberty and lives of ordinary people, whose crime against humanity is to believe that 18 years with no change in global temperature, might be an indication that the climate “crisis” has been exaggerated.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

271 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
April 7, 2015 9:54 am

They’d have us all become cogs in the State Machine.

MarkW
April 7, 2015 9:55 am

Now that the leftists are getting a taste of power, their true nature is coming to the fore.

Paul Westhaver
Reply to  MarkW
April 7, 2015 9:58 am

The night of the long knives cometh. .

Duster
Reply to  Paul Westhaver
April 8, 2015 3:19 pm

Say “Krystallnacht” instead.

April 7, 2015 9:55 am

To be honest, all I had to see was ‘…of the Gawker’ and I knew there wasn’t any credibility to the rant…

J. Philip Peterson
April 7, 2015 9:57 am

It’s time again to bring out Dr Baliunas and her talk on weather cooking:

Maybe Adam Weinstein, of the Gawker should be made to listen to this talk….

MarkW
April 7, 2015 9:57 am

As everyone knows, prior to 1950, there was never any extreme weather and crops never failed.
Therefore everything bad that happens today is the result of too much CO2.
(Do I really need the /sarc tag?)

Andre
April 7, 2015 10:04 am

Only 73 years ago,in 1942, there was an “endlosung” for the outgroup. those who were vilified as the evil enemy.
Mankind will probably never get rid of these basic instincts, creating enemies to slaughter and hence becoming a hero.

kim
Reply to  Andre
April 7, 2015 10:19 am

Ever again.
=======

Vince Causey
April 7, 2015 10:09 am

More and more sounding like West Ukrainian nationalists – Death to deniers!

Gregory
April 7, 2015 10:09 am

Bring it Adam.

Reply to  Gregory
April 7, 2015 10:18 am

Just remember… these are they same people who want to take your guns, so when they ‘cleansing’ starts you will be defenseless.

April 7, 2015 10:18 am

According to Weinstein;
Man-made climate change happens. Man-made climate change kills a lot of people. It’s going to kill a lot more. We have laws on the books to punish anyone whose lies contribute to people’s deaths. It’s time to punish the climate-change liars.
———————-
One of the reasons for this is that WE did not enforce those laws when greenie corn ethanol raised the price of food so much as to cause the “Arab Spring” food riots, which killed tens of thousands of people.
I doubt the statute of limitations has run out.

Met Tech
April 7, 2015 10:20 am

What you need to know about the extremist rhetoric comes from ancient Greek myths. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eristic Check out the goddess of Chaos, Eris, and in particular the short little stories about her “children.” You guys need to understand the history of “always winning an argument” by any means – sophistry- before you can start defending yourselves.

Reply to  Met Tech
April 7, 2015 3:32 pm

It is not a debate in which the best arguer wins. There is actually a need for scientific data to win this type of argument if truth is considered an important part of it. This is where the zealots are failing (nature isn’t cooperating). But, an alternative to debate and empirical science is the Pinochet proof of what is right or wrong. This is what this thread is dealing with. Convincing them is out of the question.

Met Tech
Reply to  Gary Pearse
April 8, 2015 12:34 pm

Please don’t take any of this personally. Sorry, you must have facts on your side, you must have the scientific method on your side; yes, of course you do, however you must know when, what, or how to argue, or not, against demagoguery and the ancient mob. The same characters are named by the Greek myths, and they are relevant still, because they are from the birth of democracy. Their tactics are well recorded. Purists are not going to win this argument, you will have to leave it up to the warriors to make your point in bloody terms if necessary.
You are too far above the frey, too good to know what rhetorical methods are being used against your arguments. I have spent much of my time with scientists, I know damn well your desire for purity. Tut tutting is not enough.
However, as Kuhn mentioned, or Popper even, there are many in science who will fight against having ANY dominant paradigm challenged. They will cover up that one dissenter’s counter evidence because losing the argument otherwise has no financial rewards. Some of you believe you must be Marxist simply because some fool labeled him a scientist.
Sorry, not only do you need the advanced calculus, you need to pay attention in all your classes. It is ironic that those who attended rhetoric classes instead, are now the ones who dominate the discussion in order to maintain that dominant paradigm.
Sorry if this seems harsh fellahs, but I was raised by a nuclear physicist myself and therefore can appreciate how wrong your attitude toward “philosophy” really is. In public affairs, there are not a few rules or principles to work with, as there are in physical science. If you are not careful, you’ll be over your heads for the rest of your careers. Kuhn, is better known that Popper, you better read both in particular Popper’s “Enemies of the Open Society.”
Wouldn’t you like to know the names and history of these enemies of freedom? So you think today’s leftists came out of no where too? Yes….in fact “rhetoric” does matter because right now, ignorance of the method dooms purists to failure. Your facts, well they don’t count, but your presentation does instead. So, if it might not be your job to stand up and fight against this menace either, if so, then pipe down and stand back, because you have obviously NOT read enough to see the wider public arena in which the sophists will otherwise continue to dominate.

April 7, 2015 10:20 am

The anti-gmo crowd and greens that keep Golden Rice off the market should be the first arrested, prosecuted and made to serve time or the people that they condemn to blindness or death. For years these people have kept this gmo rice off the market and consigned millions of poor people to blindness or death all to keep their smug view that gmo’s are evil. Their actions should be viewed more harshly than any climate denier as the harm the anti-gmo crowd causes is quantifiable and proven while their claims of deaths due due to climate change are much more nebulous and unproven.

tim maguire
April 7, 2015 10:23 am

Once upon a time, the alarmists dominated the argument and it was enough to belittle the skeptics. As the facts go against them and they lose control of the argument, their support among the public erodes. As their dominant position declines, expect them to get ever more shrill in their desperation to stop the debate before they lose it entirely.

April 7, 2015 10:27 am

If you think they’d restrict themselves to merely arresting climate contrarians, you’d be wrong.

Why climate hawks need to prepare their arsenals
Last updated on 1 April 2015, 5:13 pm
Is it time to think about using force to prevent nations and groups from contributing to climate change?
http://www.rtcc.org/2015/03/31/why-climate-hawks-need-to-prepare-their-arsenals/

I was hoping, given the date, that this was an “Onion” style joke. But I don’t think it is.

Met Tech
April 7, 2015 10:27 am

I’ve had almost thirty five years experience as a policy analyst which is nothing more than applied ethics. Here’s a link to a professional philosopher’s assessment of the sophistry movement. http://www.knavickas.com/?p=22
Unless you can spoil the leftist arguments, by turning the rules of rhetoric against them, you’ll be doomed no matter how rigorous your counter evidence might be.
Unfortunately, this all goes back to public school English classes and then goes all the way up into the journalism schools. Fortunately there are lots of professional critics from whom you can learn to crush the so called consensus.

April 7, 2015 10:29 am

Under this frame of logic, anyone who emits CO2 is a co-conspirator to murder and should be jailed. Wait…. That would be everyone !
What a bunch of idiots

MarkW
Reply to  Jeff L
April 7, 2015 10:58 am

The rules put forth by leftists, were never intended to be applied to the leftists.

Resourceguy
April 7, 2015 10:31 am

Has anyone called the FBI……to check that agency’s global warming statement.

Paul Nottingham
April 7, 2015 10:32 am

I can name people who have died because of the cold. Can he name people who have died because of global warming?

Tom J
April 7, 2015 10:33 am

This is a tweet from Lawrence Torcello. A quick Google search unearthed it, perhaps from a steaming cesspool but more likely from a maggot encrusted turd. Anyway, here is the copied and pasted tweet:
“The whole world is breaking the law by ignoring climate change.”
Got that? Let us try to use our imaginations to conjure up precisely how the whole world – the whole world – can be in violation of the law.
Hi, my name’s TomJ and I wish to turn myself in for violating a world law. And, I’m willing to accept my punishment for violating this world law. Um, but you’ve violated it too. So, do I guard you during your prison sentence? Or, do you guard me? Is it a capital offense? It is? Ok, who executes who? Do I execute you first? It’s simultaneous execution? Um, I really think the best way to do this is for me to execute you first, but honest, you can execute me afterwards.
And, thus we encounter a world law in practice.

eyesonu
Reply to  Tom J
April 7, 2015 12:16 pm

I think I have figured out a way for simultaneous execution. The 2 guilty subjects stand on opposing ends of an elevated see-saw with ropes around their neck. The one who wants to execute the other first just jumps off. LOL

April 7, 2015 10:34 am

Another suggestion: Cut off all government funding to any school or organization which permits an employee or representative to call for punishment of different opinions without terminating his/her employment. ie, no more funds.

April 7, 2015 10:37 am

For those who think this is a fringe blog, or a fringe idea with little chance of occurring – you are wrong. This is a growing sentiment. It is already being acted on in colleges, where students are thrown out for ‘crimes’ no worse than disagreeing with the professor. People are being jailed worldwide for nothing more than stating an opinion.
Read the comments if you want to see what people think. Although there are some opposing the proposal, the sheer hatred expressed there is overwhelming.
It’s going to get a lot worse.

commieBob
April 7, 2015 10:39 am

The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man falsely shouting fire in a theater and causing a panic. […] The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded_theater

The CAGW alarmists are in the position of someone falsely shouting ‘Fire’ in a crowded theater. It’s pretty clear that they intend to cause panic. Let’s jail the alarmists. “what’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander”

indefatigablefrog
April 7, 2015 10:40 am

The WHO estimates are critically discussed here.
An article which is worth reading in full, but in summary it explains that people are not potted plants. Who knew? Not the WHO, apparently…
“Firstly, it uses climate model results that have been shown to run at least
three times hotter than empirical reality (0.15◦C vs 0.04◦C per decade, respectively), despite using 27% lower greenhouse gas forcing.
Secondly, it ignores the fact that people and societies are not potted plants;
that they will actually take steps to reduce, if not nullify, real or perceived
threats to their life, limb and well-being.”
http://www.thegwpf.org/content/uploads/2014/11/WHO-2.pdf

Harry Passfield
April 7, 2015 10:46 am

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it

George Santayana
I’m stuck for a noun…N@zis?

cba
Reply to  Harry Passfield
April 7, 2015 11:36 am

try retrogressives – for over a century, these evil know it alls have called themselves progressives – but they are the opposite of that, regardless of what ‘ism they claim to adhere to.

Reply to  cba
April 7, 2015 4:33 pm

…. and for “liberal” you can substitute “totalitarian” or more accurately, since it ain’t gonna happen “totalitarian wannabe”.

Reply to  cba
April 7, 2015 5:11 pm

Yes. And just as in every modern totalitarian revolution, the ‘fellow travelers’ and ‘useful fools’ will be either permanently detained in camps, or exterminated. Because, you see, some of them still have a trace of conscience. That gets in the way of the truly ambitious ones.
So the totally immoral ones will be the most ruthless, as always. They will take power by force, and they will dispense with all the useful idiots who stupidly believed they were making the world a better place — by hook or by crook. All they’re doing by disregarding free speech now is paving the way ti their own demise. Unfortunately, they will take plenty of good people down with them.
Khruzchev bragged that during a Politburo meeting he pulled out his pistol and shot to death someone who was criticizing him. Which of the eco-greens are willing to do anything like that? The ones who won’t will be liquidated, leaving the worst of the worst. As Niccollo Machiavelli wrote:
Men ar bad unless compelled to be good.
Who in the New World Order will ‘compel’ the most evil people in society to obey the law? This isn’t the French Revolution, where Robespierre gets his comeuppance by the mob. Now, like in Cambodia, Red China, the Soviet Union, and other modern revolutions, computers, the secret police, and the military will crush all dissent. Easily.
The middle of the road folks will be swept aside in any putsch, and climate alarmists will be treated no differently than honest skeptics. Something to think about for useful fools like Michael Mann, Adam Weinstein, and David Suzuki.

April 7, 2015 10:56 am

Whom the Gods would destroy, they first make MAD!
This guy is MAD as a Hatter.
Religious fanatics always preach hate and death toward those that question their position of faith. pg

April 7, 2015 11:01 am

Fascinating that people can be so completely brainwashed to believe the complete opposite of the reality and interpret all new information in a way that reinforces the brainwash, while completely disregarding/rejecting authentic science that irrefutably shows their belief is wrong.
The increase in CO2 from 280ppm to 400ppm, has rescued life on this planet from dangerously low levels of that beneficial gas, yet, the propaganda has convinced people that this is pollution.
The modest global warming thus far has been mostly beneficial to life on this planet.
Only on global climate models based on a busted theory does the warming become a problem.
Despite 18 years of the warming having stalled out, the earth greening up(more food for most creatures) and extreme weather from many measures being less, a large faction of humans are unable to see it in front of them.

Gentle Tramp
Reply to  Mike Maguire
April 7, 2015 1:51 pm

I couldn’t agree more!
And: Is it not strange that left leaning eco-zealots, which still hate the Catholic Church for burning Giordano Bruno because he proclaimed a different opinion than the accepted religious consensus of his time, would like to persecute and oppress modern “Giordano Brunos” who don’t share the “infallible” beliefs of the current and more and more totalitarian eco-religion?
Why don’t they see their ridiculous inconsistency ???

Reply to  Gentle Tramp
April 7, 2015 8:54 pm

Total Cognitive Dissonance !

Verified by MonsterInsights