Death Threats Made Against Anti Global Warming Foes

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by red states rule, Mar 11, 2007.

  1. red states rule
    Offline

    red states rule Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    16,011
    Thanks Received:
    571
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +572
    Another example of the oh so tolerant left. Now if you speak out against global warming you get death threats


    Scientists Receive Death Threats For Questioning Man’s Role in Global Warming


    Scientists threatened for 'climate denial'
    By Tom Harper, Sunday Telegraph
    Last Updated: 12:24am GMT 11/03/2007



    Scientists who questioned mankind's impact on climate change have received death threats and claim to have been shunned by the scientific community.

    They say the debate on global warming has been "hijacked" by a powerful alliance of politicians, scientists and environmentalists who have stifled all questioning about the true environmental impact of carbon dioxide emissions.

    Timothy Ball, a former climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg in Canada, has received five deaths threats by email since raising concerns about the degree to which man was affecting climate change.


    One of the emails warned that, if he continued to speak out, he would not live to see further global warming.

    "Western governments have pumped billions of dollars into careers and institutes and they feel threatened," said the professor.

    "I can tolerate being called a sceptic because all scientists should be sceptics, but then they started calling us deniers, with all the connotations of the Holocaust. That is an obscenity. It has got really nasty and personal."

    Last week, Professor Ball appeared in The Great Global Warming Swindle, a Channel 4 documentary in which several scientists claimed the theory of man-made global warming had become a "religion", forcing alternative explanations to be ignored.

    Richard Lindzen, the professor of Atmospheric Science at Massachusetts Institute of Technology - who also appeared on the documentary - recently claimed: "Scientists who dissent from the alarmism have seen their funds disappear, their work derided, and themselves labelled as industry stooges.

    "Consequently, lies about climate change gain credence even when they fly in the face of the science."

    Dr Myles Allen, from Oxford University, agreed. He said: "The Green movement has hijacked the issue of climate change. It is ludicrous to suggest the only way to deal with the problem is to start micro managing everyone, which is what environmentalists seem to want to do."

    Nigel Calder, a former editor of New Scientist, said: "Governments are trying to achieve unanimity by stifling any scientist who disagrees. Einstein could not have got funding under the present system."
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/03/11/ngreen211.xml
     
  2. jasendorf
    Offline

    jasendorf Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Messages:
    1,015
    Thanks Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Ohio
    Ratings:
    +76
    We should all be skeptical as to whether six billion eating, breathing, defecating, consuming, living human beings could possibly be contributing to the well-documented current climate change of the Earth. Boo to those who threatened him. They're no better than anti-choicers.
     
  3. red states rule
    Offline

    red states rule Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    16,011
    Thanks Received:
    571
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +572
    Before lecturing the rest of us please start with your own moonbats

    Tell Gore to cut back HIS energy use and ask John Edwards why he needs a brand new 30,000 sq ft mansion (since he lectures how Americans are not doing enough to help the poor)
     
  4. jasendorf
    Offline

    jasendorf Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Messages:
    1,015
    Thanks Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Ohio
    Ratings:
    +76


    Sounds like you have a lot of class envy issues my friend. First you're upset about the Dixie Chicks making money... now you're upset that John Edwards makes money. Why do you hate capitalism so much?
     
  5. red states rule
    Offline

    red states rule Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    16,011
    Thanks Received:
    571
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +572
    Keep changing the subject since you cannot make a defense of the moonbat left saying one thing and doing another
     
  6. jasendorf
    Offline

    jasendorf Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Messages:
    1,015
    Thanks Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Ohio
    Ratings:
    +76
    Me change the subject? Might I humbly submit that you are the one who started the thread with death threats aimed at some researchers with a contrary view of humans' involvement in climate change and then magically moved on to "John Edwards' 30,000 sq. ft. mansion"?

    Who's changing the subject?

    Don't be mad if I called out YOUR subject change by noting your extreme class envy... which is what really seems to drive your line of thought. YOU changed the topic Mr. 30-Year-Veteran-Of-Dealing-With-The-Left... I was simply trying to find out why you changed it.
     
  7. red states rule
    Offline

    red states rule Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    16,011
    Thanks Received:
    571
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +572


    The left is constantly telling the rest of us how to liver our lives, how we need to cut back on energy use, and how we need to lower our standard of living - all to solve a problem that DOES NOT EXIST

    Meanwhile, those who do the lecturing does not live THEIR lives in the same manner

    Then, if you speak out against the non exisitent problem you are attacked and/or your life is threatened
     
  8. jasendorf
    Offline

    jasendorf Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Messages:
    1,015
    Thanks Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Ohio
    Ratings:
    +76
    Still trying to justify your changing of the subject or trying to convince us that that was what your original post was all about?

    I'm not so certain what the problem is here. I don't care what you do for or against the environment... whatever it is you do, only you have to live with that for the most part.

    For me, it's a pretty simple equation. If humans are contributing significantly to climate change then the little things I do will hopefully combat the growth of our effect and I won't have to look my kids in the eye some day and say, "whooops, sorry". If not, then I'll just have to live with the mileage-saving (which means money saving) effects of making sure my cars' tire pressure is right and be happy that my four-cylinders seem to get me to the same job as my co-workers' eight-cylinders at a lower cost to me. I can live with that.
     
  9. red states rule
    Offline

    red states rule Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    16,011
    Thanks Received:
    571
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +572

    IF is the key word. There is NO evidence that global warming really exists.

    British Documentary: Global Warming 'Biggest Scam of Modern Times'
    Posted by Matthew Sheffield on March 7, 2007 - 00:27.
    A British television station is set to do something that no American network (including Fox News) has ever done--air a lengthy documentary arguing that global warming is not caused by humans.

    The Washington Times has the story:

    With a packet of claims that are almost certain to defy conventional wisdom, a television documentary to be aired in Britain this week condemns man-made global warming as a myth that has become "the biggest scam of modern times."

    The program titled "The Great Global Warming Scandal" and set for screening by TV Channel 4 on Thursday dismisses claims that high levels of greenhouse gases generated by human activity causes climate change. Instead, the program suggests that the sun itself is the real culprit.[...]

    In his program, Mr. Durkin rejects the concept of man-made climate change, calling it "a lie ... the biggest scam of modern times."

    The truth, he says, is that global warming "is a multibillion-dollar worldwide industry, created by fanatically anti-industrial environmentalists, supported by scientists peddling scare stories to chase funding, and propped up by compliant politicians and the media."

    Channel 4 says that the program features "an impressive roll-call of experts," including nine professors, who are experts in climatology, oceanography, meteorology, biogeography and paleoclimatology.

    There's lots more:

    Scientists in the Channel 4 documentary cite what they claim is another discrepancy involving conventional research, saying that most of the recent global warming occurred before 1940, after which temperatures around the world fell for four decades.

    Mr. Durkin's skeptical specialists view this as a flaw in the official view, because the worldwide economic boom that followed the end of World War II produced more carbon dioxide, and therefore should have meant a rise in global temperatures -- something he says did not happen.

    "The Great Global Warming Swindle" also questions an assertion by the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's report, published last month, that it was backed by some 2,500 of the world's leading scientists.

    Another of Mr. Durkin's professors, Paul Reiter of Paris' Pasteur Institute, an expert in malaria, calls the U.N. report a "sham" because, he says, it included the names of scientists -- including his own -- who disagreed with the report and who resigned from the panel.

    "That is how they make it seem that all the top scientists are agreed," he says. "It's not true."


    http://newsbusters.org/node/11241
     
  10. jasendorf
    Offline

    jasendorf Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Messages:
    1,015
    Thanks Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Ohio
    Ratings:
    +76
    Now you're just being silly or stupid. Perhaps both.

    That global warming is occuring isn't just conjecture, that's documented. What is at play here is whether humans share any of the blame. Most of the deniers shade their words in terms such as "human-induced climate change"... in other words, they're trying to fool simpletons into believing that climate change/global warming isn't occuring at all... while remaining factually correct. Did humans "induce" (or start) climate change? Obviously not. Are 6 billion humans a major contributing factor? That's what's up for debate.
     

Share This Page