Tag Archives: Totalitarianism

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.

Alberta judge defends student’s free speech against U of Calgary

A surprising defeat for fascism in Alberta, Canada. (H/T Andrew)

Excerpt:

An Alberta judge ruled last week that universities are not entities deserving of independence and protection from the state, but rather that they are part of the state. In her decision, involving a case where twin brothers challenged being punished by the University of Calgary for negative Facebook posts about an instructor, Justice Jo’Anne Strekaf ruled that the university violated the Charter right to free expression. The landmark decision may have legal precedence, but it will unnecessarily handicap universities when acting as universities.

As only Parliament and provincial legislatures are subject to the Charter, Strekaf has confirmed that at least some policies held and enforced by universities are on par with government legislation when certain Charter rights are concerned.

In 1990, a Supreme Court ruling concluded that, despite government regulation and funding, universities “control their own affairs and enjoy independence from government regarding all important internal matters.” That ruling, long cited by universities accused of violating the Charter, did leave open the possibility that some university activities could be subject to Charter review.

Strekaf’s contribution is, briefly, that when dealing with the hiring and firing of staff, universities are not government. With respect to students, however, universities educate them according to a government mandate and, therefore, are government.

While the university argued that its disciplinary policies are part of a private contract between the U of C and students, Strekaf concluded that those policies are too closely related to the school’s educational mandate to not be considered government action.

Strekaf could have only ruled that the punishment (six months’ probation) was excessive, or inconsistent with university policy, or that the students’ comments were not defamatory, and left it at that. But no, the judge went all the way, and whittled Ivory Tower autonomy down to a pathetic nub.

[…]If Strekaf’s ruling holds, it will prove popular among any number of campus protest groups, and anti-abortion clubs in particular. Such groups have been denied campus space for their activities at schools across the country, and have even been arrested and charged with trespassing. They may now have a remedy.

I hope this decision will help the Canadian pro-life students who have to deal with censorship and coercion all the time. You’ll recall that the Canadian pro-life students face censorship, expulsion and even imprisonment from left-wing university administrators.

Neonatal survival after withdrawal of artificial hydration and nutrition can last up to 26 days, according to a case series presented here at the 18th International Congress on Palliative Care. Although physical distress is not apparent in the infants, the psychological distress of parents and clinicians builds with the length of survival, said Hal Siden, MD, from Canuck Place Children’s Hospice in Vancouver, British Columbia.

“These babies live much, much longer than anybody expects. I think that neonatologists and nurses and palliative care clinicians need to be alerted to this,” he said. “The time between withdrawal of feeding and end of life is something that is not predictable, and you need to be cautioned very strongly about that if you are going to do this work.” He presented a series of 5 cases that clinicians at his hospice had overseen over a 5-year period.

Pro-life protesters arrested and detained in UK

Story here in the UK Telegraph. (H/T Suzanne)

Excerpt:

Andy Stephenson, 35, and Kathryn Sloane, 19, both committed Christians, were detained after a peaceful protest outside a publicly-funded abortion clinic.

The Crown Prosecution Service will decide next month whether to press charges against the pair for causing ‘harassment, alarm or distress’ under the Public Order Act.

[…]The pair were arrested last month as they held a banner aloft outside Wistons abortion clinic in Brighton.

Police were called by a member of staff concerned that patients entering the clinic felt traumatised and upset.

Officers asked Mr Stephenson and Miss Sloane to take down a 7ft by 5ft placard depicting an aborted eight-week-old embryo – which they duly did but only to replace it with another banner showing a 10-week-old foetus.

The pair were arrested and taken to Brighton police station where they were held until three in the morning.

Mr Stephenson, a father-of-two and a carpenter, from Worthing in East Sussex, said: “We went to the clinic because we know what women are going in there for and it seems the obvious place to hold a protest.

“We had no desire to be arrested but we sincerely believe this is a legal form of demonstration.

“We were arrested around midday. We were taken to the local police station where we were treated like common criminals.

“They took our fingerprints and put us in cells – they didn’t interview us until midnight and we weren’t let out until three in the morning.”

The UK is a party dominated by secular humanists on the political left. Their desire for selfish pleasure is so strong that they look upon any attempt to disagree with them or make them feel bad about what they are doing as a punishable offense. Secular humanists are very clear about what they believe. They believe that life is about the pursuit of happy feelings. They have no concept of human rights like the right to free speech in their atheistic worldview. So if you interrupt them in their pursuit of pleasure and draw attention to the destruction they are causing, they will attack you. They believe that the strong have a right to crush and coerce the weak into serving their desires for happiness.

To a secular humanist, everyone else exists as a depersonalized object to be used and thrown away. Other people have no value – and there is no such thing as virtue or a way humans “ought to be”. It’s is very much a Darwinian struggle to use the people around you in order to have the most happiness you can until you die. Morality is is just the fashion of the time and place – it’s not real. There is no standard of conduct. You obey the fashions of your place and time unless you can somehow break the rules and avoid being caught and sanctioned. Ethics is illusory on secular humanism. It’s just traffic laws and personal preferences.

The same people who oppose pro-lifers today would have opposed the abolition of slavery. The situation is identical. Declare a group of weaker, disadvantaged people to be non-persons, and then exploit them. Anyone who is pro-abortion (i.e. – who votes for left-wing parties like the Democrats) is pro-slavery. Period. The principle of abusing and killing the weak for your own happiness is the common denominator between both views. Only in a theistic universe do persons have human rights granted by God, like the right to life, and the right to free speech. In an atheistic universe, rights can be brushed aside by the strong.