Tag Archives: IPCC

Everybody go vote in this Scientific American survey on global warming

The survey is here on the Scientific American web site. (H/T ECM)

Questions:

  • Should climate scientists discuss scientific uncertainty in mainstream forums?
  • Judith Curry is:
  • What is causing climate change?
  • The IPCC, or Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is:
  • What should we do about climate change?
  • What should we do about climate change?
  • What is “climate sensitivity”?
  • Which policy options do you support?
  • How much would you be willing to pay to forestall the risk of catastrophic climate change?

My answers were:

  • Yes, it would help engage the citizenry.
  • a peacemaker.
  • natural processes
  • a corrupt organization, prone to groupthink, with a political agenda.
  • Nothing, we are powerless to stop it.
  • an unknown variable that climate scientists still do not understand
  • keeping science out of the political process
  • nothing

Take the survey! It’s important to send them a message.

Related posts

You can find my previous posts on climate change by clicking here.

Should Al Gore be arrested for inciting eco-terrorist hate crimes?

Al Gore inspired this eco-terrorist
Al Gore inspired this eco-terrorist

Consider the Democrat position on free speech that “may” incite violence, as stated in the bill they passed that criminalized free speech.

Excerpt:

The crime bill — which would broaden the protected classes for hate crimes to include sexual orientation and “gender identity,” which the bill defines as a victim’s “actual or perceived gender-related characteristics” — passed the House earlier this year as a stand-alone measure. But it’s never had the votes to succeed by itself in the Senate. So over the summer Democrats, with the power of their 60-vote majority, attached it to the defense bill.

Republicans argued that the two measures had nothing to do with each other. Beyond that, GOP lawmakers feared the new bill could infringe on First Amendment rights in the name of preventing broadly defined hate crimes. The bill’s critics, including many civil libertarians, argued that the hate crimes provision could chill freedom of speech by empowering federal authorities to accuse people of inciting hate crimes, even if the speech in question was not specifically related to a crime.

That’s their view – free speech that may incite a crime should be criminalized.

Whose free speech inspired the eco-terrorist?

From the Instapundit.

Excerpt:

ECO-TERRORISM? Gunman who took hostages at Discovery Channel inspired by Al Gore. “Lee appears to have posted environmental and population-control demands online, saying humans are ruining the planet and that Discovery should develop programs to sound the alarm. . . . Lee said he experienced an ‘awakening’ when he watched former Vice President Al Gore’s environmental documentary ‘An Inconvenient Truth.’”

Won’t Al Gore please stop it with his extremist, eliminationist rhetoric before he inspires still more violence?

Al Gore’s speech did affect the views of the eco-terrorist. Is Al Gore’s speech to blame for this crime?

NO, I don’t think Al Gore should be blamed for inciting the eco-terrorism. The eco-terrorist is to blame for his eco-terrorism. I believe in free speech, even for eco-fascists like Al Gore. But Democrats don’t believe in free speech that is critical of their views – that’s why they banned free speech that disagrees with their views in their hate crime bill.

So what should we do to stop this from happening?

The problem with the loony left, (mainstream news media, Hollywood, unions, Democrats, non-quantitative academic departments), is that they always want to teach their view, and their view alone, in the schools. And they want to demonize anyone who disagrees with them using words like racist, sexist, homophobe, etc. They don’t to debate with the other side, because the other side is just EVIL. Not even worth listening to.

So how about we do this instead – let’s teach both sides of every issue, so that loonies like James Lee know the arguments on the other side as well as he knows the arguments on his side. Now that would be teaching tolerance and diversity. That would moderate the craziness of people on MSNBC and eco-terrorists and the UN IPCC.

More on the writings of the Al-Gore-inspired left-wing Democrat eco-terrorist at Hot Air and Michelle Malkin.

Darwinism and atheism

Evolution News takes a look at some of the eco-terrorist’s writings.

The eco-terrorist wrote:

Develop shows that mention the Malthusian sciences about how food production leads to the overpopulation of the Human race. Talk about Evolution. Talk about Malthus and Darwin until it sinks into the stupid people’s brains until they get it!!

And the eco-terrorist also wrote:

Civilization must be exposed for the filth it is. That, and all its disgusting religious-cultural roots and greed. Broadcast this message until the pollution in the planet is reversed and the human population goes down!

Is this connection a surprise?

Witness the recent examples of Holocaust Memorial Museum shooter James von Brunn, Columbine High School shooter Eric Harris, Jokela High School shooter Pekka Eric Auvinen. Historical figures who drew inspiration, if indirectly, from Darwinian theory include Charles Manson, Mao Tse-tung, Joseph Stalin, Josef Mengele, and of course Adolf Hitler.

You don’t derive an ethic of love and compassion from Darwinian moral relativism and the doctrine of survival of the fittest.

Related posts

    Der Spiegel reports that just 42% of Germans believe in global warming

    Fox News reports. (H/T Dad)

    Excerpt:

    Germans citizens are rapidly losing faith in global warming following the Climate-gate scandals, according to a new report in Der Spiegel.

    The report indicates that just 42 percent of Germans are worried about global warming, down substantially from the 62 percent that expressed concern with the state of the environment in 2006.

    German news site The Local analyzed the results from the poll, conducted by polling company Infratest for the German newsmagazine. Many people have little faith in the information and prognosis of climate researchers, The Local explained, with a third questioned in the survey not giving them much credence.

    This is thought to be largely due to mistakes and exaggerations recently discovered in a report of the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said the site.

    Der Spiegel is the New York Times of Germany, except further to the left, if that’s possible.

    Meanwhile, the left-wing Guardian reports. (H/T ECM)

    Excerpt:

    Humans are too stupid to prevent climate change from radically impacting on our lives over the coming decades. This is the stark conclusion of James Lovelock, the globally respected environmental thinker and independent scientist who developed the Gaia theory.

    It follows a tumultuous few months in which public opinion on efforts to tackle climate change has been undermined by events such as the climate scientists’ emails leaked from the University of East Anglia (UEA) and the failure of the Copenhagen climate summit.

    “I don’t think we’re yet evolved to the point where we’re clever enough to handle a complex a situation as climate change,” said Lovelock in his first in-depth interview since the theft of the UEA emails last November. “The inertia of humans is so huge that you can’t really do anything meaningful.”

    One of the main obstructions to meaningful action is “modern democracy”, he added. “Even the best democracies agree that when a major war approaches, democracy must be put on hold for the time being. I have a feeling that climate change may be an issue as severe as a war. It may be necessary to put democracy on hold for a while.”

    It’s all about controlling other people.