Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Professor Joseph A. Palermo, writing for the Huffington Post, thinks anyone who doesn’t agree with climate alarmism shouldn’t be allowed to use any of the products of science.
Republicans, Climate Change, And The New Reality
Joseph A. Palermo
Professor, historian, author
First off, let me be clear: The Republican Party bears responsibility for Donald Trump becoming the 45th President of the United States. The Republican Party nominated him. The party leaders enabled him. There were many complex social, political, and economic forces that produced the Trump catastrophe, but no amount of disassembling and deflecting will change the fact that the Republican Party made this happen.
…
Through his public statements and personnel choices Trump has made it clear that he rejects the science of climate change. I’ve always believed that people who dismiss science in one area shouldn’t be able to benefit from science in others. If Trump and his cohort believe the science of global warming is bogus then they shouldn’t be allowed to use the science of the Internet for their Twitter accounts, the science of global positioning for their drones, or the science of nuclear power for their weaponry.
The oil, coal, and gas companies use the same scientific methodology to extract resources that climate scientists use to confirm the planetary disaster that awaits us. It’s pretty crazy to see the U.S. government abandon science when it conflicts with corporate profits, while Trump’s donors from Big Ag, Big Banks, and Big Pharma deploy science to patent new life forms, engage in “high frequency” trading, and invent new drugs.
…
Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joseph-a-palermo/republicans-climate-chang_b_13866868.html
The history of science is riddled with episodes of error, mass delusion and group think.
We don’t reject Sir Isaac Newton because he believed in Alchemy, we recognize the great man made a few mistakes, and accept the enormous contribution Newton made to mathematics and physics.
We don’t reject the work of Einstein because he was wrong about the nature of Quantum randomness. We accept that scientists can be wrong.
We don’t reject the entire field of medicine because for many decades, the medical community wrongly rejected the theory that many stomach ulcers are caused by a bacterial infection.
And we don’t reject free speech, because some people say things with which we disagree.
Using the same logic, Professor Palermo should be denied the freedom to express his views because he doesn’t believe in the freedom of expression of others, Mr. Trump included.
Logic? What is this “logic” you speak of?
You know, I sometimes think it would be a whole lot better for everybody, if our hive-hero, ivory-tower mouth-offs, of the good professor’s vintage, were to just spend their privileged-white-dork parasite-lives exclusively devoted to those wanker-friendly flicks, that they originally viewed in an actual theater, and that fired the imagination of their collective, zit-normative, socially-awkward, late-adolescent prime, and from which they acquired those painfully-imitated, creep-out “smooth-moves” of theirs, that, of course, never worked for them, even though those very same “gallantries” were pure “magic” when wielded by their favorite film-stars–priceless examples of the cinematic art, thankfully preserved in our tenured hive-betters’ comprehensive, VHS and Betamax, vintage-porn collections–and leave all the “big-thoughts” business to us “good guy” lovers of Liberty and ethical science.
Mike, that’s a mouthful!
Eh?????…….
Here is your logic.
MEMORANDUM TO: All those implicated
FROM ……..: All those distressed
TOPIC …….: The eradication of bafflegab in all hereafter memos
In riposte to the overabundant profusion of indeterminate scriptures mandated as to amplify unproductive overwhelmingness. The heretofore stated negligence is inharmonious with the preponderance of the unprejudiced motivated dysfunctionalities. Linear delineation must predominate any aforementioned aspiration oriented objectionals. As in preceding unsolicited preconceived concepts as requested, it behooves us to spontaneously endeavour to persevere. Preceding essayists in this substance have consummated deficiency. Displacing oral incontinence will invalidate inconclusively the negative yield of expectational priorities. Inexperienced innocence will only preclude conclusionary postulates, which will be included in the ensuing preceding memorandum. Spasmodic proclivity previously undemonstrated will not be endured. In eventuality, all retroactive forethought will be discouraged through implemented conservative liberalistic proclivities. Antisubversive tendencies will agonize disciplinary investigational probabilities. Unyielding persistencies of impassivity is contingent upon overconsumptiveness. Preceding inclusions will be exclusively denied admission to output passage for an indeterminate predetermined duration of time. Hereafter gatherings will be held retroactively. Uninterconnected deinstutionalized oversimplification is simply a contemplation of self determined mediocrital improvisation. Unconsolidated ambiguosity will be treated with inappropriate ambivalent fortudinous credulity. Tridirectional foci can be amplitudinally resisted chronologically.
@Ross King
Yr: “Eh?????+multiple unconnected doits”
Maybe this’ll help Ross, for the last line read: “and leave all the “big thoughts” business to us “good guy” lovers of Liberty and ethical science, GIVEN OUR SELF-EVIDENT SOCIAL COMPETENCE, OUR PRINCIPLED DEVOTION TO HONEST LABOR, AND OUR PROVEN TRACK RECORD IN THE STUDLY, TRYST-MAGNET PROWESS DEPARTMENT.” Got the picture now, Ross?–speakin’ of which, I mean, like, there’s a photo of the dude, topside there in the post, and everything, so just look at that sucker! See what I mean?
Mike:
Despite yr elaboration, I’m still at a loss as to what point(s) you are trying to make.
I *think* you’re trying to say that a Majority-Vote of sensible, regular folks can beat the Ivory-Tower B_S from the pols. in the Washington Swamp.
If I am correct, I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU!
BTW, I am ex-Brit, now Canadian, but I am fully familiar with the same old rhetoric. You are not alone!!
Every so often, the machetes have to come out and reintroduce a system based on fundamental values of the majority of voters, *not* the power-elites and their cozy sycophancy..
God bless you, Sir
Ross
And it all fit in one sentence!!!
Hans – thank you, that clears things up nicely.
Yaaay. Another ad hominem screed from Mike. What a guy.
@ur momisugly Jeff Alberts
Yr: “…another ad hominem screed from Mike. What a guy.”
Hey Jeff! Thanks much for your enthusiastic, drive-by compliment, above there, or was it really just a little-sneak, snippy, ironic fake-attaboy? Hmmm…well, since we’re just a coupla, regular-guy ol’ buddies, I’m gonna give you the benefit of the doubt and assume the former. So in that spirit, Jeff, thanks again for your very kind words.
But while I relish your “What a guy”, high opinion of l’il ol’ moi, I really cannot, in good conscience, accept your understandable admiration, without noting that I am a mere follower in the footsteps of my improbable hero, Saul Alinsky, who established, as his 5th rule for radicals:
“Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating.
And so the hive-bozos ridicule us “good-guy” lovers of Liberty and ethical science, and so I ridicule them. It’s an understanding we have, derived from a common source.
And that the “other side” is infinitely more vulnerable to a good razzing than us “good-guys”, thanks to their group-think, safe-space tethered, beta-weenie, wanker-normative personal qualities; their puffed-up, obnoxious, smarty-pants airs; and their brazen-hypocrite carbon-piggery–so in-you-face that they won’t even hold their innumerable, interminable, carbon-phobe eco-confabs as video-conferences, even though such a video-conference format would not only provide for a zero-carbon event, thereby resulting in zero, post-conference dead-babies and zero, post-conference, dead polar-bears, but would also allow Third-World, Women Climate-Scientists of Color, from impoverished nations, to participate in their field on an equal footing with the good-ol’-whiteboy, privileged-paleface-dorks, currently runnin’ the Gaia-hustle on a de-facto “closed shop” basis, highly recommends the employment of ridicule by “our side”. But you knew all that already, right, Jeff?
“Hey Jeff! Thanks much for your enthusiastic, drive-by compliment, above there, or was it really just a little-sneak, snippy, ironic fake-attaboy?”
Does it matter? Your ego is clearly in full overdrive. Have at it.
@ur momisugly Jeff Alberts
Yr; “Have at it”
Well, Jeff, since I have your permission, let me give my “ego” a free rein.
You know, Jeff, I rather think we both have “big egos”. But while my big ego, in “overdrive”, inspires me to craft comments that are alive with a coruscating wit, sensual charm, and a “good-guy”-lover-of-Liberty-and-ethical-science charisma, your “low-energy”, passive-agressive, big ego, in contrast, Jeff, seems, in contrast, to merely trigger a more-or-less excretory reflex, in you, producing faintly unsavory, semi-liquid comment-extrusions, figuratively speaking, of course, that are classics of the tedious, crabby, pop-off, fuss-pot, bot-replicant persuasion.
And could it be, Jeff, that your gibe-booger interest in moi, derives from some sort of slow-burn anger, you might harbor, at the injustice of a cruel world that neglects your attention-seeking schtick, such as it is, even as it showers its flutterings on those less worthy? But different strokes for different folks, Jeff, ol’ sport. And there’s a place for both of us on this blog, I think you’ll agree. “Have at it”, good buddy.
This was the first thing that came to my mind as well.
If Professor Palermo believes that the Constitutional Rights afforded to ALL Americans do not apply to President Elect Trump, then; using his own logic, Professor Pallermo should be forced to give up HIS Constitutional rights
Maybe his ilk is that ALL Americans should give up their constitutional rights (to “save Gaia”).
A little twist, wondering what would happen to the “Professor ” if he visited Palermo and mouthed of about the local ” Politico’s ?”
“Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.”
George Orwell 1984
So far he is not even the President yet this supposed academic “expert” of history is already claiming this as a catastrophe.
Apparently he refutes that what has not yet occurred is part of the future, not part of “history”. He denies what history is. He should be sacked forthwith, and prevented from publishing or communicating anything about history ever again.
The election of The Donald is by no means a product of the Republican Machine being fuel by Donald Trump Supporters but is simply a failure of the Democratic Machine to bolster sufficient support for Hillary. Just 2% of Democrats voted for Gary Johnson instead of Hillary and that gave Donald Trump the percentage needed to secure 4 key battleground states.
It is the Democrats that elected Trump by NOT supporting Hillary
Remember Greg, he is “modeling.”
“It is the Democrats that elected Trump by NOT supporting Hillary”
I will attest to that, as one who always “rode ‘D’ side of the fence” as a public employee, but when the progressives showed their reddish tints during BHO’s second term I and those I associate with “hopped the fence” realizing that the Dem promises to organized labor are like “whitewashed tombs”.
Greg: Since global warming science can know the future, I see no contradiction in the man using a claim of knowing the future of politics in the same way. There’s probably a model out there that shows Trump’s presidency is 95% likely to be a disaster, which is the same as “absolutely certain”.
Clearly, ‘Greg’ inhabits a surreal world. An inhabited pseudo realism only he/she can rant off. Both pussy and prick and typical loser.
Trump may have played to win the electoral votes needed and HRC played the popular vote. He won and she lost.
Professor Palermo should be allowed to express his views, but only in a way consistent with his views on climate. Since almost every means of communicating his message depends on technology enabled by easy access to the cheap, plentiful energy he opposes, he should confine himself to standing on street corners and shouting through a megaphone. He would, of course, be limited to corners within walking distance.
That was my first thought as well, sauce for the gander etc.
and vegan cold food,
nothing synthetic, or from animals either clothes n footwear wise
bless his scabby knees and little cotton socks! 😉
and no power or tech like his ph or Pc etc
as theyre ALL such nasty polluting things
Using the same logic, Professor Palermo
====================
Should only use carbon neutral technology in his own life. Anything that is not carbon neutral he should already have stopped using it, to demonstrate his commitment to his own beliefs.
First and foremost, Professor Palermo should not be telling anyone else to be carbon neutral unless he himself is carbon neutral. Like Gore and DiCaprio. Shining examples of green hypocrisy, telling everyone else to do as they say, not as they do.
I for one would like to see that particular carbon life form not devour or use any carbon for the rest of his life. Lets see how that turns out…
Well I don’t know what classic comics Joe Palermo is reading, but the “Republican Party” did everything in their chicken little power to submarine the candidacy of Donald Trump.
So the only way it might be said they caused this, is that the electorate were fed up to the gills with having the halls of Congress filled with these dead beats that they elected to get something done, and they all went to sleep for the duration of the Obama scorched earth program.
Sorry Joe but the people caused this; not those clowns in the Republican establishment. They better shape up, or they will be shipping out in 2018.
G
Agreed. Trump had to battle the Republican elites the whole way and it is not over yet. The Republicans will not be his best friends over this next 4 years.
Mark, it’s time for both parties to get back to fundamentals and quit trying to interpret a capitalist inspired system in a socialist perspective. The Neo’s and the Prog’s need to be reeducated.
It is simply astonishing that this polysci character is so stuffed with blind self importance.
e.g.
I, Professor Joe Palermo hate the First Amendment and I especially despise people who use the First Amendment to speak their minds and the truths about science.
I, Professor Joe Palermo want Trump punished for using his First Amendment rights!
To that end, Trump should be denied Twitter, a technology based in and built upon fossil fuels.
Twitter and other modern sciences/technology should be reserved for elites like me, who believe the one environmental religion and faithfully follow the dictums of the invisible minority known as “the consensus”.
I, Professor Joe Palermo despise the First Amendment and other rights that gives common people the insouciance to question their betters regarding personal rights and proper intolerant government by us elites.
Do not worry, as Professor, historian and author, I am teaching your children all about government.
Yeah, he’s a polysci teacher and future despot. I hope he gets some serious help soon; maybe lewserandownsky?
Also, Professor Palermo should not be able to use cars, heaters, air conditioners, plastic products, etc., because they are produced by, with or out of evil products……..
The real crime here is Professor Palermo being a Professor, when he is a hack poisoning the minds of students.
+1000
Yet another illiberal un-democrat.
Joseph Palermo
Professor
PhD, Cornell University (1998)
Specialization: U.S., twentieth-century politics
Anyone want to bet that Prof. Palermo of U.S. 20th century politics buys into the lie that President Truman authorized A-bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki merely for cynical and callous Cold War reasons?
Somebody ought to inform him that his thoughts/beliefs are “So Last Century”
Professors are vermin.
“I’ve always believed that people who dismiss science in one area shouldn’t be able to benefit from science in others”
Obviously he was talking about Gore, DiCaprio. the IPCC, Paris Agreement, China, India, all the “developing” countries, etc etc
Well this is the 21st Century. nobody cares about 20th Century politics any more.
G
So he should know about Joe McCarthy then.
First, I admit that I am a “lukewarmer,” who believes that the tangible pollution in Asia and many population areas of the world (see recent satellite photos) needs to be addressed by the international community.” Along with economic development, there is a pressing need to eliminate poverty induced inefficient use of energy and natural resources, such as forests, wood chips and cow dung.
I don’t think that we can afford to allow alarmism to misallocate investments and human capital.
Someone has to rewrite 20th century history in order to re-educate all of us deplorable.
Lats…Specialization: U.S., twentieth-century politics…
What are the odds that this …US 20th Century politics specialist is still tipping Tom Dewey over Truman.
And what are the odds that this specialist in US politics got it dead right and declared The Donald over the line.
Those 60 million voters that gave The Donald well over the 270 electoral college votes had nothing to do with the result. It was all that support and aid…albeit adulation… given by The Republican Establishment that done us all wrong.
That and The American Democracy System…As Usual.
Oh! Nearly Forgot. Hillary won the Popular Vote. And is the Queen of all The Future Proms to be held in the USA. Forever. So There.
That Tom Dewey was the bestest ever Prez of The USA.
AcademiksROOLZ!
I think that anyone who thinks we should restrict, tax, cap-and-trade, or otherwise reduce the use of oil should be banned from using oil or any evil oily products like plastic …
w.
+ lots and lots
+ lots more
http://philinter.com/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2016/05/HIT-THE-NAIL-ON-THE-HEAD.jpg
and then some.
I’d suggest that they not be allowed to purchase anything at a store that was transported using oil.
Not just oil, but any molecule containing carbon. Let’s be purists about this.
You are actually requiring Professor Palermo to just “cease to be,” which I’m okay with at this point, since he’s apparently already lacking cognitive function.
Or things that depend on oil, like the food in a grocery store.
Best analogy yet!
Exactly my thought right off the bat. Live by your principles. Park the car, disconnect from the grid and go it the all-renewable way.
Having lost the election the good professor fears losing the argument. Nothing succeeds like success. We have had three decades of ‘guidance’ by the four horsemen of the eco-apocalypse (WWF, FOE, Greenpeace and OXFAM). Now we may have two or three years of counter-management of the biggest boondoggle in history outside WWar.
Professor-physician, heal thyself. Show us the way. We who cleaned up the environment over the past 40 years will clean up the chaos that has invaded science in the past 20. There is an empty cabin somewhere in the woods looking for a hewer of wood and drawer of water. You clean that up, we’ll deal with the rest.
Ted Kaczynskis is available
Nor any carbon containing substances such as food.
After all they would not want top be hypocrites.
oops fat fingered to into top
Eating the CO2 Producing food is OK so plenty of Animal Protein but nothing that Sinks Carbon because hurting the Carbon Sink is bad so no veggies. And no fire to cook it because burning releases CO2 So Lots of RAW MEAT and no Veggies
And I would expect them to refuse any medical treatment that was developed or enhanced with the use of carbon-based technologies.
Hear hear. Lead by example. Practice what you preach. Show the great unwashed the proper way forward. Walk the walk. Carry the flag!
Cube…Show the great unwashed the proper way forward. Walk the walk. Carry the flag!
If all the academics and Luvvies switch off their showers abd Bathrooms from The Traditional Grid it would be The Great Unwashed getting lectured by…The Even Greater Unwashed.
Can we ask them to live it like they lecture it and act as if they actually believe in it.
Yes. We Can.
No. They Won’t.
Good point, the deal should go both ways.
+10^3
The Dems’ #1 issue is protecting a woman’s right-to-choose, which rejects the scientific determination of when life begins.
One of the Dems current and recent top issues is the rejection of science on the very definition of gender.
But it is the GOP that rejects science?
Seriously, can we please keep reproductive and gender politics off WUWT? Sir, I disagree with you on one, and probably more or less agree with you on the other – neither of which has anything to do with science, global warming or climate change.
Smart Rock,
Professor Palermo has advanced a principle that one’s attitude toward a particular area of science should affect his relation to other areas. Seems to me legitimate for Michael to point out by example that Palermo’s principle generalizes poorly.
“Professor Palermo has advanced a principle that one’s attitude toward a particular area of science should affect his relation to other areas. Seems to me legitimate for Michael to point out by example that Palermo’s principle generalizes poorly.”
If that’s the case, Roy Spencer’s creationist beliefs have bearing on his scientific credentials. It goes both ways.
Michael, I agree. Let’s keep things on-topic.
Besides, abortion and gender are social issues. The scientific side (life is continuous and sex exists) is unquestioned by both parties outside of the extreme margins. The social side (about when you should be allowed to abort a fetus and the social psychology of gender norms) are quite frankly, outside the purview of this message board.
Don’t conflate social issues with scientific ones. You end up answering the wrong question. That’s sort of Ignorantio Elenchi falacy is the cause of a lot of our biggest headaches.
Yes, let’s keep things on topic. No more of that discussion.
“Laugh-a while you can, monkey boy.”
one of my favorite movies, thanks
Once again we see that environmentalists are not humanists.
“Now, Therefore THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.
Article 2.
Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion …
Article 19.
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
…
Hypocrits.
“It can’t happen here” is always wrong: a dictatorship can happen anywhere.”
― Karl Popper, Unended Quest: An Intellectual Autobiography
I can’t help wondering when the fire and brimstone of this clash between the climate belief systems will enter into a more constructive period? Whatever happened to the gentility of the loyal opposition
debate?
“Whatever happened to the gentility of the loyal opposition
debate?”
We are talking about delusional Leftists here. Delusional Leftists don’t do “gentle”. They have no viable policies to offer, so their only weapon is their nasty mouths, and that’s what they use. They are convinced conservatives are the Devil, so don’t expect civility from them.
Delusional leftists are all firmly convinced that they are smarter, better educated, and better informed than all us deplorable flyovers. They don’t need to explain themselves, we should all recognize when we are in the presence of our betters and knuckle our foreheads, bow our heads, bend our knees, and do as we are told. As TA said above, they are delusional.
However, that doesn’t excuse us from being civil. Name calling or self-righteousness isn’t an argument. From either side of this discussion.
This proposition presupposes that that Alarmists would be prepared to listen & debate the issues coherently, dispassionately, and according to Scientific Principles. Having stopped calling us “Deniers” and “Cranks”, and called-off those who would restrict our liberties, and started taking our arguments seriously, the “constructive period” may have a chance of evolving. My guess is that this have to wait until pigs can fly.
Eric, very well stated.
And our good friends in the Mainstream Media here in the U.S and elsewhere — but most recently PBS News Hour on TV in the US, need also to stop buying into (or “hoping against hope”), there is some magic cure to our dependence on fossil fuels. Witness a piece they ran last night, which they have since deleted from their web site, because it was so embarrassing. A Greek retired “professor of physics” invented a way to get energy out of water, by dissociating the Hydrogen from the Oxygen using “vibrations” which the show liked to the trumpets bringing down the walls of Jericho (in Biblical Times).
I saw it myself live last night, and was amazed they ran it.
Related content can be found here: http://www.off-grid.net/power-tap-water/
Their normal link to the show (now missing this the segment on power from tap water) can be found here
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/episode/pbs-newshour-full-episode-dec-27-2016/
… with several comments still on the blog section of that page about their idiocy, and asking why they are they trying hide their mistake now.
oops 🙂
Meanwhile, the 2013 PBS story reporting that 90% of Greenland’s ice mass thawed in July 2012 remains on their web site.
The reason broadcast journalism gets so little respect is that they deserve so little respect. PBS NewsHour is widely considered to be America’s leading television news team. So, when they needed to hire a “Reporter/Producer on Science and Climate Change,” do you think they looked for a scientist, or maybe a dual-major science & journalism grad?
Of course not. Competence is not one of the job requirements.
Instead, they hired a young, pretty, feminist film criticism major, fresh out of college. Her senior honors thesis at UNL was entitled, “Unzipping Gender.” She’s a perfect conduit for every nonsensical climate scare that comes down the pike, and she was the author of that story reporting that 90% of Greenland’s ice mass had thawed.
But she’s obviously not the only innumerate member of the PBS NewsHour Team. They are all that bad. No one there knows enough about science even to question a “free energy from water” hoax, or the claim that 90% of the Greenland Ice Sheet had just melted.
No wonder they all believe in CAGW.
Oh, BTW, you can read more about her in a PBS article entitled, “The stories behind 23 STEM superstars.”
Yep, that’s right. What does it take to be a “STEM Superstar” at PBS NewsHour? A Bachelor’s degree in feminist film criticism, a senior honors thesis entitled, “Unzipping Gender.”
That PBS show needs to be covered here on a dedicated thread. They’ve been caught trying to cover up the fact that they disseminated disinformation. Their qualifications to comment on climate change? None.
How hard do you have to wiggle a water molecule to make it fall apart? Where does the energy for all that jiggling come from?
You could do it with UV light with a wavelength of ~125nm.
Cube…hello again…Do you think Mr Watts will give me just a little license about…How hard do you have to wiggle a water molecule to make it fall apart?
I have something I like to wiggle…Lots and lots of us do. And mine has not yet fallen apart.
Has anyone had theirs fall apart?
I think PBS has been caught wiggling in a public place. And I think they have wiggled so much in public that all their wiggly things have fallen apart.
Normally they would just tell President Obama and he would get one of his fiercely independent public officials to send them some free money that grows on Trees out back of the White House. To fix the problem,or better still, buy then as many new wiggly things as they want as only Fascists and Neanderthals do not accept the right of our Bureaucrats to Wiggle furiously and whenever they like.
Unfortunately…Tragically…President Elect Trump and all the biased and bribed officials he is keen to appoint have gone on record that as soon as they get control of all the Free Money Trees this Frenzied Wiggling Orgy at public expense will be no longer.
This New President and his band of bought bureaucrats are Blind to all the benefits of Wiggling.
Private or Public.
Re. the PBS item on “Power from Tap-water”, Thin Air wrote:
“… with several comments still on the blog section of that page about their idiocy, and asking why they are they trying hide their mistake now.”
What was their mistake? To have reported (in an abysmally poor fashion, admittedly) on an invention which they should have known is impossible because it breaks the First Law of thermodynamics? That is what the derisory comments at the linked web-site appear to be suggesting.
But when did the First law of thermodynamics become an insuperable law of the universe? Conventional physics has already accepted, decades ago, that parts of the universe may exist in which the known laws of physics do not necessarily apply. They are called “singularities”. Black holes and fundamental particles are perhaps the two best-known examples of singularities at present, but there is no prohibition in science against people discovering or creating more of them. Who is to say that Petros Zografos has not created a novel singularity in his invention whereby the normal constraints of the First law of thermodynamics have been overcome? Even the “extremely skeptical” expert from the Niels Bohr Institute, Jacob Trier Frederiksen, didn’t say that.
Science and technical invention progress by subjecting proposed ideas to critical real-world testing and seeing which ideas pass the tests and which ones don’t, not by prejudging them by the preconceived standard of what scientific knowledge we think we already possess, i.e. the First law of thermodynamics in this case. Zografos’s power-from-tap-water generator has not been critically tested yet, so it would be premature to declare it to be false. I think we should reserve judgment until the due process of science has run its course.
As it happens, there are well-established scientific reasons for thinking that Zografos’s generator might possibly work, the First law of thermodynamics notwithstanding. Of course, it could not possibly work if it was simply splitting water molecules and then re-assembling them again without drawing on any external source of power to do the initial splitting; that would be a violation of the First law. But suppose he has found a way to draw power from the all-pervading quantum vacuum via the appropriate resonant vibration-frequencies of the water-molecule. In that case his device could work without violating the First law because it would be drawing on an external source of power. Then the water molecules would appear to be splitting spontaneously without drawing power from any observable source and producing a net energy-surplus above that required to run the machine when the constituent hydrogen and oxygen atoms are recombined.
In conclusion, it is evident that conventional science allows that Zografos’s idea might be viable and it needs to be tested thoroughly before we can decide whether it is or not. To make the decision at this stage would pre-empt the necessary science, not apply it.
Band Trump from Twitter? Trump would love that.
Trump won’t be banned from Twitter. That this guy suggests its possible shows how detached from reality he is.
Twitter might go out of business though, if they keep censoring conservative speech.
If they do, Trump can switch over to Facebook, or maybe even breath new life into the completely free Usenet, where anyone can say anything they want, and people who don’t like it can say anything *they* want back.
Trump could start up a moderated Usenet newsgroup which would keep out the trolls, and he could get his message out to everyone who wants to see it. Everyone can get access to Usenet, even if you don’t have any money. There are free servers available for Usenet text groups, and most people’s ISP’s give you free access.
Long live the Internet!!!
The commentary is delicious, especially for Huffpo. People are seeing through he smokescreens,…
“Joseph A. Palermo
Professor, historian, author”
…and complete and utter twat!
I will reject the idea that someone’s rantings who is arrogant and stupid makes him the arbiter of good science. This idiot lives in California, which is governed by party of one intention only.. to control the lives of all who live in the state. I would question Mr Palermo’s judgement of that alone.
The “Trump catastrophe”? He isn’t even President yet. Sort of like reviewing a book without reading it.
And “[t]he oil, coal, and gas companies use the same scientific methodology [sic] to extract resources that climate scientists use to confirm the planetary disaster that awaits us.” Can anyone decode this and tell me what “scientific methodology [sic]” the oil/gas/coal companies use in extraction that is in any way the same as the “science” used by the “climate scientists”?
No
Fortunately the oil, coal, gas companies do not use the same “scientific methodology” as the CAGW “scientists” otherwise they would go bankrupt using fake data and drilling more dry holes.
Arithmetic?
Ban
Anti-democracy.
Its hardly down to the Republicans that Trump is President elect, they ran what, 15 candidates against him FFS!. Trump’s victory is down to idiots like Palermo and the utter lack of cross examination by the MSM of the drivel they utter as well as a brainless, arrogant and dismissive campaign by Clinton.
It is Palermo and his arrogant, empty headed ilk who are the true deplorables.
Now, now, I wear my “Deplorable” badge with honor, please don’t go disparaging it. I think the word you are looking for is despicable.
PhilR,
you are so correct and I most humbly withdraw ‘deplorable’ and replace it with ‘despicable’.
Anthony,
what chance WUWT starts selling “I AM DEPLORABLE” / “JE SUIS DEPLORABLE”
badges? I good for a box full and I am sure they would be a huge hit right around the world.
M Seward
Again, the ONLY reason Trump won was the 2% of Democrats that Couldn’t bring themselves to vote for Hillary. The Democrats elected Trump by not voting their candidate
Perhaps that was from running an unelectable candidate in the first place.
I was ‘Deplorable’ before deplorable was cool….
……..it’s a religion of peace
But….But….But…..This man denies climate scepticism! How dare he use science to propagate his evil message!
When the planet doesn’t overheat, when hurricanes and typhoons aren’t sweeping every continent daily, when droughts and sea levels don’t simultaneously starve and drown us, I want this man to be held responsible for our children’s future. I want him to explain to them why he condoned the gross waste of their money on a fruitless, scientifically moribund quest for the holy grail of the grim reaper, and the right to lord it over peasants and say “I Told You So”.
Simplistic, genetically deficient, scientifically ignorant, sheepy Muppet!
So funny how leftists hate “corporations” and anything big like big pharma, but then they want big government to rule us all.
Willis,
Brilliant reply.
The flaw in his argument is assuming that “the science of climate change” is normal science.
Well if Post Modern Art is still art, then Post Modern Science can still be called science, albeit loosely
Does he own a car?
@rogerthesurf: Yup. Exactly what I keep thinking every time individuals like Palermo open their big mouths and says thing like this. This is coming from someone who probably contributes his fair share of CO2 emissions to the global annual total unless he lives his life free from demand for fossil fuels.
In the absence of divestment of demand for fossil fuels from their own lives (and proof of it), this always leaves me wondering how many fossil fuel bashers/demonizers really understand the level of hypocrisy they are demonstrating and how foolish it makes them look. I have little doubt that many of them probably don’t fully realize what will happen to their standard of living and quality of life if they were to eliminate the demand for fossil fuels from and terminate their fossil fuel CO2 emission in their lives.
It’s about time that people in high places (like Trump) speak up and make the whole country aware of the hypocrisy of these people and issue them a challenge to divest their lives of that demand. Demanding a premature end to the fossil fuels era when the alternative technologies are not yet in place (except for nuclear) is doing things bass ackwards.
Be careful of what you ask for—you just might get it. And don’t bite the hand that feeds you.
Probably a Toyota Pius.
Even with a Prius which still uses some petrol/gasoline fuel, consider the amount of fossil hydrocarbons that were used in the manufacture (plastics, rubber, lubricants, etc) of and will be used in the continued maintenance of said car…
Interesting thought. Actually I have never understood the rationale of the Toyota Prius. It seems unlikely, considering the extra kit the car has to be loaded with, that the fuel economy can be significantly increased.
I think they are expensive dogs.
But as current opinions show, such a vehicle is probably politically acceptable.
Well, if Trump shouldn’t use the products of science, then people like Palermo shouldn’t use the products of fossil fuels that they hate so much.
Also, the word he is looking for is “dissembling”, not “disassembling”. If you’re going to talk rot, you should at least spell your drivel correctly.
A typical Left-wing nut in full flow. Anyone who holds a different opinion to theirs should be barred / silenced / oppressed / imprisoned / shot / thrown to the dogs / executed. Delete as appropriate. #nutters
If Trump and his cohort believe the science of global warming is bogus then they shouldn’t be allowed to use…
To what authority does Professor Palermo appeal? Is there some sort of shadow government that he is speaking to? If not, then might I conclude he is proposing armed insurrection? Or perhaps something more mundane like Barking Mad Obama refusing to turn over the reign’s of power?
My own view is that if Palermo and his cohorts believe in the catastrophe of CO2, then they shouldn’t be allowed (by their own choice) to use it. Sorry Professor Palermo, you’ll have to give up your car and you can’t use public transportation either. You’ll have to walk. You can only buy food that is locally produced close enough to you that you can forage nearly every day since you won’t be able to use a fridge or freezer. Oh, and you’ll have to eat it raw since you can’t cook it. If you contract a food born disease you’ll have to recover on your own, or die. No heating for your home when it is cold, no air conditioning when it is hot. Ooops, you won’t have a home either, nearly forgot you’d have to give that up. You’ll have to do with whatever natural shelter you can find, hope there’s a cave within walking distance of you. Walking distance will be quite short since you’ll be bare foot.
Oh, and blaming Big Banks for supporting Trump? LOL. I thought professors of history were supposed to teach history. Turns out I was wrong, they’re allowed to write it?
“Sorry Professor Palermo, you’ll have to give up your car and you can’t use public transportation either. You’ll have to walk.”
Yeah, if the alarmists really believe putting CO2 in the atmosphere is an existential threat to human life on planet Earth, then it should be easy for them to give up the things in their personal life that generate CO2.
The Left should start a “Minimalist” movement where they all agree to forego creating any more CO2 (with the exception of breathing, they should be allowed that), and then we can see just how serious the average American is about CO2, by counting the number of people who join the Minimalist Movement.
Give it up, Left (the CO2, I mean)! Put you money where your mouths are. Join the movement. Show us how it’s done.
Breathing is OK but they must wear CO2 Capture and Storage rebreather equipment
Bryan A:
This is a beautifully funny construct, for which I thank you!
At 40,000 ppm CO2 exhalation, the next step in The Absurd will be that we *all* have to buy offsetting CarbonCredits!
But then they should also wear H2S capture and storage equipment.