Guest essay by Eric Worrall
h/t michel – According to Guardian author Keith Kahn-Harris, Trump’s enabling of climate “deniers” is comparable to and possibly influenced by the allegedly growing tendency of extreme anti-semites to openly celebrate the mass murder of Jews in WW2, instead of cloaking their hatred with holocaust denial.
Denialism: what drives people to reject the truth
From vaccines to climate change to genocide, a new age of denialism is upon us. Why have we failed to understand it?
By Keith Kahn-Harris
Fri 3 Aug 2018 15.00 AEST…
Those who were previously “forced” into Holocaust denial are starting to sense that it may be possible to publicly celebrate genocide once again, to revel in antisemitism’s finest hour. The heightened scrutiny of far-right movements in the last couple of years has unearthed statements that might once have remained unspoken, or only spoken behind closed doors. In August 2017, for example, one KKK leader told a journalist: “We killed 6 million Jews the last time. Eleven million [immigrants] is nothing.” A piece published by the Daily Stormer in advance of the white nationalist rally in Charlottesville that same month ended: “Next stop: Charlottesville, VA. Final stop: Auschwitz.”
…
Still, over time it is likely that traditional denialists will be increasingly influenced by the emerging post-denialist milieu. After all, what oil industry-funded wonk labouring to put together a policy paper suggesting that polar bear populations aren’t declining hasn’t fantasised of resorting to gleeful, Trumpian assertions?
…
It is hard to tell whether global warming denialists are secretly longing for the chaos and pain that global warming will bring, are simply indifferent to it, or would desperately like it not to be the case but are overwhelmed with the desire to keep things as they are. It is hard to tell whether Holocaust deniers are preparing the ground for another genocide, or want to keep a pristine image of the goodness of the Nazis and the evil of the Jews. It is hard to tell whether an Aids denialist who works to prevent Africans from having access to anti-retrovirals is getting a kick out of their power over life and death, or is on a mission to save them from the evils of the west.
If the new realm of unrestrained online discourse, and the example set by Trump, tempts more and more denialists to transition towards post-denialism and beyond, we will finally know where we stand. Instead of chasing shadows, we will be able to contemplate the stark moral choices we humans face.
…
Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/aug/03/denialism-what-drives-people-to-reject-the-truth
What utter filth. Comparing climate skepticism to celebrating the murder of millions of Jews. Suggesting that people expressing skepticism of shaky scientific claims actually want to cause the death of millions. For shame, Guardian.
Climategate email 1120593115.txt, retired CRU director Phil Jones speaking.
… As you know, I’m not political. If anything, I would like to see climate change happen, so the science could be proved right, regardless of the consequences. This isn’t being political, it is being selfish …
Source: Wikileaks
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
When they write like this, it is made clear that it is to attack PEOPLE, not what they say or write.
This is deliberate ugliness for the singular purpose of destroying any form of a decent debate, then they can drive in their propaganda drivel unopposed to spread their lies. They want you to cower in silence to destroy debate, because they KNOW they would lose the debate, thus shutting you down is their preferred method.
This is an attack on your free speech rights!
Then when they get booed, they will claim their very life was on the line.
it’s worse.
the common enemy of the tyrant is the ability to reason. obedience requires the submission of rationality to somebody else’s whim.
unwillingness to obey is an existential threat to the slave master.
eloi stragglers hold up the lunch line.
Utter filth it is too.
There is overwhelming evidence for the holocaust.
There is overwhelming evidence against CAGW.
CAGW is the largest genocide in history. Millions starve annually because we misallocate money towards a leftist fantasy.
These were the bad projects. As you might see the bottom of the list was climate change. This offends a lot of people, and that’s probably one of the things where people will say I shouldn’t come back, either. And I’d like to talk about that, because that’s really curious. Why is it it came up? And I’ll actually also try to get back to this because it’s probably one of the things that we’ll disagree with on the list that you wrote down.
The reason why they came up with saying that Kyoto — or doing something more than Kyoto — is a bad deal is simply because it’s very inefficient. It’s not saying that global warming is not happening. It’s not saying that it’s not a big problem. But it’s saying that what we can do about it is very little, at a very high cost. What they basically show us, the average of all macroeconomic models, is that Kyoto, if everyone agreed, would cost about 150 billion dollars a year. That’s a substantial amount of money. That’s two to three times the global development aid that we give the Third World every year. Yet it would do very little good. All models show it will postpone warming for about six years in 2100. So the guy in Bangladesh who gets a flood in 2100 can wait until 2106. Which is a little good, but not very much good. So the idea here really is to say, well, we’ve spent a lot of money doing a little good.
And just to give you a sense of reference, the U.N. actually estimate that for half that amount, for about 75 billion dollars a year, we could solve all major basic problems in the world. We could give clean drinking water, sanitation, basic healthcare and education to every single human being on the planet. So we have to ask ourselves, do we want to spend twice the amount on doing very little good? Or half the amount on doing an amazing amount of good? And that is really why it becomes a bad project. It’s not to say that if we had all the money in the world, we wouldn’t want to do it. But it’s to say, when we don’t, it’s just simply not our first priority.
http://www.ted.com/talks/bjorn_lomborg_sets_global_priorities/transcript?language=en
I don’t know where the U.N. gets the figure “for half that amount, for about 75 billion dollars a year, we could solve all major basic problems in the world. We could give clean drinking water, sanitation, basic healthcare and education to every single human being on the planet.” Citation by the U.N. of these cost estimates needed. I bet it is magnitudes greater than that. Universal healthcare paid for by the government in the U.S. would cost about $2.7 TRILLION dollars (roughly 15% time our GDP of about $18 T). The U.N.’s numbers are laughable. [Not making a value judgement on government paid for health care, just making an estimate.] To educate the 50 million school age children in the U.S. it costs around $500 billion (50 million times an average of about $10,000 per year per student). I’d like to see them try to provide “education to every single human being on the planet” for $75 billion.
They are talking about those that have none. The figures are sound, but feel free to argue with a panel of Nobel Laureate economists, and don’t worry about the genocide.
“CAGW is the largest genocide in history. Millions starve annually because we misallocate money towards a leftist fantasy.”
oh, the leftist fantasy of feeding the world at my expense?
not having any of that. not my fault. not my responsibility.
A lot of those people are already in school. The additional cost is to bring the omitted into the net. There are a lot of girls in that category.
Those intolerable ‘Trumpian assertions” have served admirably to unmask the desperate condition of those so thoroughly defiled that they just can’t resist demonstrating what they truly have to offer their neighbors by way of integrity, verity, and grace. Flooding the dark corners with light is a most salutary means to see just what scurries away sputtering!
“After all, what oil industry-funded wonk labouring to put together a policy paper suggesting that polar bear populations aren’t declining hasn’t fantasised of resorting to gleeful, Trumpian assertions?”
It’s difficult to take seriously the mind-reading from a columnist who is obviously unaware that polar bear populations aren’t actually declining. Still, there’s moral hazard from such unhinged equivalence between climate skepticism and holocaust denial. Aren’t they worried that people noticing that none of the hyped catastrophic threats from AGW are actually happening might conclude that evidence for the holocaust is on similar shaky ground?
I would rate this columnist as being 100 times more dangerous than the handful of self proclaimed neo-fascists. This columnist and the lies which he wrote will trigger some percentage of the clueless greens into thinking that they need to act out just like what occurred in Charlottesville. Only one group had a permit to hold a rally in Charlottesville on that day. There would have been zero violence except for the ignorant left/antifa types forcing the issue. There would have been almost no media coverage in Charlottesville, except for the mindless left/antifa types promoting their hate and violent tactics.
Sick. dangerous, deranged and deluded. Not much more you can say.
lol. Poor chap. This UK summer, denialist women have celebrating global warming by lying on the ground outside wearing only bikinis. And their male counterparts have been blatantly cooking meat on barbecues. Is there no end in sight to this suffering ? 🙂
Yep, when I call my Mum in Leeds on the weekend, she usually starts out with “Ooooh the weather’s been glorious again”. I neglect the opportunity to tell her that she should be self-flagellating for her heresy.
Lib against Susan Crockford (sp?) about nondecline of polar bears?
I am sure she is still waiting on her first check from the oil industry, as am I.
I gave you a + for the Esq.
look! esquirrel!
“The heightened scrutiny of far-right movements in the last couple of years has unearthed statements that might once have remained unspoken, or only spoken behind closed doors. In August 2017, for example, one KKK leader told a journalist: “We killed 6 million Jews the last time. Eleven million [immigrants] is nothing.”
An utterly astonishing statement from a supposed intellectual!
I’m far right, as I suspect are most on this blog, as is Donald Trump. But I have never condoned strutting around with uniforms and jackboots, dispensing violence and acting in my own interest other than to ensure my family is well provisioned for, and safe in our community.
What this man see’s as the ‘far right’ is fascism, the left wing antifa also demonstrate it in their distorted attempt to suppress free speech because it offends their worldview.
Fascism was created by Mussolini, one indoctrinated by his father into socialism. One who joined his socialist party and was kicked out. So he went to the right, and in short order was kicked out of that Italian institution. He created fascism, employed black shirt bully boys to range free and ensure people were forced to install him as Italy’s leader.
Hitler admired this reprehensible reprobate and fashioned his own ‘National Socialist German Workers’ Party’ in the form of fascism. In other words, please the elite and we can do what we want with all their money, in return, they’ll get preferential treatment.
Hitler right wing? I’m damn sure no right-winger would have voted for Adolf with a party title like that, so he bribed, threatened and incited influential industrialists to work with him.
The KKK was a product of the Democratic party. As I understand it, the Republicans were the antidote to slavery, yet somehow, the evil of socialism has been manipulated to implicate right-wing values.
As I said, I’m as far right as one can get. I believe in a small government largely devoted to defending our shores. That is after all where the concept of a national income tax came from. One penny on the pound for the UK to fight the Napoleonic wars.
I believe in freedom of expression, low taxes (not no taxes) the responsibility of the individual for their own welfare, profitable enterprise, democratic representation and the rule of law.
I do not condone violence other than in defence of our shores. So where in all that is my association with ‘The far right’? Or Mao, and Stalin’s murderous regimes; Pol Pot; the self-announced Marxist Mugabe who has destroyed the breadbasket of Africa, Zimbabwe, run in a colonialist fashion by peaceful white farmers in a successful and profitable fashion for the good of the country, rather than the good of Mugabe.
Cuba, N. Korea and now Venezuela, all eating up their own countries in the pursuit of an insane idealism which has proven so wrong, time and time again.
Why do we tolerate the filthy cancer of socialism? Humans were born from free trade, our laws evolved from the concept, our cultures were built on it, our communities thrived on it, our cities built by it. Everything around us is the product of free trade and Capitalism.
socialism does nothing but stifle progress, poison minds and condition the meek to accept handouts instead of encouraging them to achieve for their family.
And this despicable fool deems to slander hard working people with the brand of ‘The far right’ when he is deluded enough to not even recognise that societies poison emanates from his very soul.
HotScot,
Indeed, fascism, fundamentally being the subordination of individual rights to the needs of the state, is most correctly understood as Left-wing in nature. That there exist bigoted, tribal people “on the right” (and btw, bigotry and tribalism exists in people of all stripes and creeds) is irrelevant, and does not make the Right fascist.
You might enjoy Jonah Goldberg’s “Liberal Fascism” if you haven’t already read it.
rip
rip
Indeed, bigotry and tribalism aren’t restricted to the left, but its institutionalisation is unique to the left.
Witness the labour party in the UK, it’s own angelic and formerly untouchable leader Jeremy Corbyn attending rallies where anti-Semitic views were openly expressed, if not announcing them himself.
As for reading, the last thing I read was The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire by Edward Gibbon, and I managed the first chapter before giving up. I still have the 8(?) volumes in case I get bored when I retire. But I’d rather go fishing. A little time for me to think.
🙂
spoiler alert:
– Gibbon correctly identified Christianity as the ultimate cause of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire.
It was an extremely intolerant cult back then.
And yet the Eastern Roman Empire, ie Byzantium, lasted another 1000 years until conquered by the Turks. Even then, most Levantines, ie Syrians and Palestinians, were still Christians.
In the West, the Dark Ages probably would have been even darker without the Church, which maintained the organizational structure of the empire. Of course, it did also spread the faith by fire and sword into Germany and Lithuania.
In the West, the Dark Ages probably would have been even darker without the Church…
====
The Church created the Dark Age.
http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/winter.html
“…darker without the Church…”
gold coin from King Offa of Mercia, 774, imitating a gold dinar of Abbasid caliph al-Mansur, emblazoned with Arabic script stating:
“There is no god but Allah. alone, he has no partner”
http://www.englishmonarchs.co.uk/images/offa2.jpg
“…darker without the Church…”
“…darker without the Church…”
Giordano Bruno
Galileo Galilei
Witch burning
Crusades
Inquisitions
etc
Perhaps in Theo-logical circles requiring great leaps of faith, the dark ages were made a little brighter by the presence of the Church.
But I’ve seen no evidence for that.
You’ve seen no evidence because you haven’t looked. It appears that you don’t know when the Dark Ages were, which is the first half of the Middle Ages, ie AD 476 to 1066 or thereabouts, depending upon the region.
The citation about conditions in the Dark Ages doesn’t blame Christianity. The barbarians who sacked Rome were also Christians, albeit Arian “heretics”. Monks in the British Isles and later elsewhere preserved learning.
Had you ever actually studied the Dark Ages, you’d know to what extent the Church and its monastic orders provided what stability and succor was then available in Western Europe. Society would have been even more lawless and violent without order imposed by the Church.
Of course some Islamic coins made their way to Anglo-Saxon England. Trade with the East never shut down completely. The Norse went up the rivers of Russia and the Ukraine to trade with Saracens. Then they went down others to Byzantium.
Charlemagne exchanged emissaries with Caliph Haroun al-Rashid, who courteously addressed the Holy Roman Emperor as “Frankish dog”. I don’t know if Rashid knew that Charles’ grandfather “The Hammer” saved Europe from the infidel clutches of the caliphate.
Bruno, GG, the Inquisition and witch burning were long after the Dark Ages. As were the Crusades, although in principle there was nothing wrong with the attempt to liberate Christian lands from Turkish tyranny. In practice, obviously, the liberators could have done a better job. Same goes for the Reconquista of Iberia.
Much as I admire Gibbon, he is wrong. His anticlerical bias got the better of his historical judgement.
“Much as I admire Gibbon, he is wrong”
====
I see that you expect the audience to accept your faith-based assertions.
http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/IMAGES/4th-imperial-portrait.jpg
4th century imperial portraits – gold inlaid within glass, decorated with gems.
http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/IMAGES/charle-son.jpg
Charlemagne and son. 10th century copy of 8th century Carolingian manuscript.
Charlemagne beheaded 5000 “pagans” who refused to join his intolerant anti-scientific Jesus cult. That’s how Christianity got started in the west.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_of_Verden
Jews also suffered terribly under the yoke of the Christian cult, only finding safety under ISLAM in Andalus
Isn’t it funny how half the lexicon of western science is in ARABIC?
Your faith-based, fictionalized version of apologist history could never account for that fact.
No faith involved. Just the facts. The faith is all yours.
I already mentioned that Charlemagne slaughtered the pagan Saxons into submission. But that is not how Christianity got started. That was as a cult among women, slaves and other marginal members of society. Christianity was 350 years old before it became the state religion of the Roman Empire.
By contrast, Islam was spread entirely by the sword for at least its first 500 years. So you have it back-assward.
Half the lexicon of science is not in Arabic. The names of some stars are, because viewing is better in the desert. Algebra was transmitted to the West from India via the Islamic world, along with “Arabic” numerals.
But very few Muslims have contributed to science since the Revolution of 1543, compared to Westerners and East Asians, and very little original before then. Even their preservation of some ancient texts proved unnecessary after the Fall of Constantinople and the exodus of Greek scholars to the West. Copernicus learned Greek from one of the diaspora members.
Hotscot
What happens if we view the Earth as one country, all mankind as citizens, and the borders as encompassing the whole planet? The defense of borders becomes the defense of institutions against the rise of lunatics and those disposed to violence, and civil unrest.
I don’t see this as a bad option. Why should groups of humans hunker down behind borders and tell the rest of humanity to suck lemons? The fact that it would end war is an attraction and there is no reason to suppose that such a federation could not be an elected one. A few countries enjoy privileged status. On what grounds? Sez who? People want a just society and we will not get it from socialist dogma nor capital accumulation. ‘Parties’ are nothing more than legal factions. We can do without them too.
When we have a real Conference of Parties, it should be about the elimination of warfare, not the elimination of CO2. I am afraid a couple of billion people will die before that happens. Most leaders aren’t.
Crispin in Waterloo
Sorry mate, but isn’t that just a bit Kumbaya?
Humankind has evolved from ambition, conflict and tribalism. Dispense with it, live in eternal harmony, and there would be no desire to progress. Therein lies extinction of the human race with no desire to fight for life.
The end to war is a noble ambition but one completely at odds with human nature. If we all accepted that fact, not that I desire war, instead of overreaching to an idealistic nirvana the liberals all convince us of, the world would probably be a better place.
Humans fight. We fight with our siblings, our parents, our partners, our children, our friends and anything else that threatens our personal domain. Bears, tigers, little green men, and even our dog when it shits on the kitchen floor.
Conflict is THE human condition.
Capital accumulation is why we have eight billion people, on average the richest ever, instead of a billion people mostly steeped in abject poverty.
How many people have died from global warming, exactly?
All of them, if you are using the right model.
Probably quite a lot from the real variety, but from the phony baloney variety, in round numbers, it could actually be a round number.
The only ones for certain are the ones like the poor sap who set himself alight in Central Park a few months back.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn4259-european-heatwave-caused-35000-deaths/
And that’s just one event in 1st world countries.
Ive commented before that, although genuine sane AGW proponents who truly believe are in large numbers, such a cause which carries with it blame of a group of people and a desire to punish, is a magnet for dangerous types, hateful types of a fragile mental constitution.
Recall that the Pause created the so-called “Climate Blues”, a career ending epidemic of climate scientists who apparently couldnt face the implications of a pause that lasted as long as the warming they had been concerned about (although they rationalized it differently). But these are the good guys! Honest victims of the game.
Nor am I referring to the amoral, shameless dishonest, adjusters and manipulators of data who cheat to win. No I mean the blind thoughtless followers with a screw loose. This isnt as ugly yet as its going to get.
Well he is reporting in the grauniad. No science allowed int eh Grauniad – just hate.
“The heightened scrutiny of far-right movements in the last couple of years has unearthed statements that might once have remained unspoken, or only spoken behind closed doors. In August 2017, for example, one KKK leader told a journalist: “We killed 6 million Jews the last time. Eleven million [immigrants] is nothing.”
An utterly astonishing statement from a supposed intellectual!
I’m far right, as I suspect are most on this blog, as is Donald Trump. But I have never condoned strutting around with uniforms and jackboots, dispensing violence and acting in my own interest. I do however ensure my family is well provisioned for and safe in our community, an entirely peaceful endeavour unless I’m called on to physically defend my family, my rights and my property. Which on a rare occasion has been necessary.
What this man see’s as the ‘far right’ is fascism. The left-wing antifa also demonstrate it in their distorted attempt to suppress free speech because anyone other than them exhibiting or exercising their right to freedom of expression offends their worldview.
Fascism was created by Mussolini, indoctrinated by his father into socialism. One who joined his socialist party and was kicked out. So he went to the right and was kicked out of that as well in very short order. He created fascism, employed black shirt bully boys to range free and ensure people were forced to install him as Italy’s leader.
Hitler admired this reprehensible reprobate and fashioned his own ‘National Socialist German Workers’ Party’ in the form of fascism. In other words, please the elite and we can do what we want with all their money, in return, they’ll get preferential treatment.
Hitler right wing? I’m damn sure no right-winger would have voted for Adolf with a party title like his, so he bribed, threatened and incited influential industrialists to work with him.
The KKK was a product of the Democratic party. As I understand it, the Republicans were the antidote to slavery, yet somehow, the evil of socialism has somehow been manipulated to implicate right-wing values into some sort of distorted representation of peaceful Capitalism.
As I said, I’m as far right as one can get. I believe in a small government largely devoted to defending our shores. That is after all where the concept of a national income tax came from. One penny on the pound for the UK to fight the Napoleonic wars.
I believe in freedom of expression, low taxes (not no taxes) the responsibility of the individual for their own welfare, profitable enterprise, democratic representation and the rule of law.
I do not condone violence other than in defence of our shores. So where in all that is my association with ‘The far right’? Or Mao and Stalin’s murderous regimes; Pol Pot; Mugabe the self-announced Marxist who has destroyed the bread-basket of Africa, Zimbabwe, run in a colonialist fashion by peaceful white farmers in a successful and profitable fashion for the good of the country, rather than the good of Mugabe.
Cuba, N. Korea and now Venezuela, all eating up their own countries in the pursuit of an insane idealism which has proven so wrong, time and time again.
Why do we tolerate the filthy cancer of socialism? Humans were borne of free trade, our laws evolved from the concept, our cultures were built on it, our communities thrived on it, our cities built by it, our countryside shaped by it. Everything around us is the product of free trade and Capitalism, socialism has contributed nothing but division.
socialism (capital ‘s’ deliberately omitted) does nothing but stifle progress, poison minds and condition the meek to accept handouts instead of encouraging them to achieve.
And this despicable fool deems to slander hard working people with the brand of ‘The far right’ when he is deluded enough to not recognise that societies poison emanates from his very leftist soul.
Climate extremists love making own goals.
Now for the [alleged] warming in 2100 ( it’s always 2100 because 250 is not scary enough), who wil be causing the majority of enissions for the rest if this century?
It’s the non annex 1 [countries] of the Kyoto protocol.
This is so much BS. First off, I have never heard anyone in western society celebrate the holocaust. Second, the Anti-Vaxers are almost exclusively climate alarmists. These people the author are talking about are not the same people.
What the hell is an “anti-vaxer”?
simple-touriste
Anti vaccination. As in the MMR scare when people were told the combined vaccination caused complications, for which, from memory, a certain doctor who promoted the concept was vilified by his profession. Not soon enough to stop the rumor propogating and threatening herd immunity.
Herd immunity is a myth. The church of vaccines will vilify anyone who dares to disagree.
simple-touriste
Why did you ask if you have all the answers?
And might I remind you that WUWT isn’t a conspiracy blog, you won’t go unscrutinised for your unscientific rants which, other than your climate change opinions, seem mostly at odds with most here.
I’m sure there are many conspiracy blogs out there you would feel right at home at.
Herd immunity is real.
And it makes sense that it would be. If a disease needs to spread to become an epidemic placing the infected on a desert island or in quarantine would stop that epidemic. Surrounding them with immunised people is like placing them on a desert island.
The disease doesn’t spread. The disease doesn’t have many iterations.
The disease cannot evolve to be worse.
Here is a scholarly paper providing observations that confirm the common sense.
Herd immunity is a reality. How can it not be real?
“What the hell is an “anti-vaxer”?”
From your posting history, it appears all you need to do is look in the mirror to see one.
Jeff in Calgary. I agree as it’s been my observation that there is a large overlap between alarmists, anti-Vaxers and anti-GMO. Though there are exceptions, for example this forum’s resident anti-vaxer is also a CAGW skeptic.
I think have been banned by almost all forums, websites, blogs … that aren’t about climate skepticism where I posted more than a few messages. It’s notable that I have been banned for life (which is a temporary measure) several times on a France Television (state controlled TV) forum.
Who wasn’t banned immediately on that same forum? Someone who regretted Hitler has not “finished the job”. It took the guy a lot more similar messages to be banned.
But saying “if you [think] Africa is so great and you love Africa, you should go to Africa” gets you banned. That’s the way it goes on the website of a state controlled channel.
This guy is delusional! He really needs professional help!
I’m utterly disgusted by the Guardian’s comments.
The Guardian ?
Guardian of WHAT ? — Guardian of Twisted Nonsensical Stupidity ?
The Guardian of propaganda
This shows what a trashy rag the Guardian is. It’s readers must have the mentality of pre=schoolers.
i liked the bit..”id like to see climate change happen
yeah
and were ALL still waiting
The systematic murder of millions of Jews as the result of an explicit government policy over several years seems to me to be a pretty clear binary proposition. That being, it either happened or it did not. A related case is the Armenian genocide, in which case we have the systematic murder of millions of Armenian Christians that is denied as a matter of government policy by Turkey. Maybe the “denial” is in fact a dispute about the definition of the word “genocide”. Maybe it is a case of illnumeracy, where the murder of millions is merely twice as heinous than the murder of a thousand. Maybe the use of the word “genocide” is just too judgmental in some people’s minds.
As for whether or not the climate is changing, the facts are simple: climate always changes. The fact that as recent as 25,000 years ago where the city of Chicago sits was covered by a mile of glacial ice is a good example of that variation. Another example would come from the quaint cliff dwelling communities in the American southwest that are now tourist attractions. About 1,600 years ago those communities thrived, that is until a recently-documented mega-drought changed the climate to be far less amicable to subsistence farming. How can someone deny that Chicago is no longer smothered by a glacier?
But the advocates of “climate change” always seem to have a broader goal in mind. Not only do they want me to accept the accuracy of their models, 97% of which wildly deviate from the real trends of the real climate as time goes forward, but they also make demands for government policy. And by strange coincidence, almost all of their policies converge far more on socialism than on real remediation of climate problems.
Look, human life depends upon a healthy biosphere, at the very least for our food. I for one am concerned that wheat and barley can no longer be cropped in Greenland as it was when it was first settled a millennium ago by Vikings. Talk about changing climate.
It’s not that simple. The Soviet government enacted a Scorched Earth policy at the beginning of WW2, before Germany even invaded Russia. They moved many millions of people from Western Russia and Poland to prepared factories in the east. When the German military conquered Russian cities, they typically found them only half occupied. The Soviets especially prized Jews for their education, and made extra effort to move all possible Jews to the east. This is well documented. They had two goals, to ensure high factory productivity, and to burden the German forces with millions of starving people.
After the war at the Nuremburg trials, the Soviets sent general Nitichenko, the man who ran the Stalin show trials, to be their representative. He was given carte blanche to introduce all kinds of unsubstantiated evidence. Clearly he was highly motivated to exonerate and cover for Soviet crimes, especially wartime slave labor and mass movement of civilians.
This does not contradict the Holocaust, but there a possibility that the USSR was heavily involved in making Jews ‘disappear’. However, until Germany backs off their holocaust laws, historians will not be free to investigate. Perhaps that’s the intent.
Just what is denialism about this?
Isolating the Impact of CO2 on Atmospheric Temperatures; Conclusion is CO2 has No Measurable Impact
https://co2islife.wordpress.com/2018/08/01/isolating-the-impact-of-co2-on-atmospheric-temperatures-conclusion-is-co2-has-no-measurable-impact/
Facts are, the evidence is that CO2 doesn’t cause climate change. Until the alarmists can refute the above-linked post, they are the denialists. Accuse others of what you are guilty of is the motto of the Alarmists.
The only real deniers are those who refuse to accept what the real data and real science is telling them. Climate Alarmists will never be able to refute these facts and analysis. The fact that they don’t even address them proves they are living in willful denial.’
Isolating the Impact of CO2 on Atmospheric Temperatures; Conclusion is CO2 has No Measurable Impact
https://co2islife.wordpress.com/2018/08/01/isolating-the-impact-of-co2-on-atmospheric-temperatures-conclusion-is-co2-has-no-measurable-impact/
Until that analysis can be refuted, the alarmists simply have no case. It is all a big lie. Climate alarmists are simply accusing others of what they are guilty.