Climate Activists Step Up Calls for Imprisoning Climate Realists

[Sunsettommy]

Another evidence that warmist/alarmists don't give a dam about that pesky first amendment.

Watts Up With That?

Climate Activists Step Up Calls for Imprisoning Climate Realists

Anthony Watts / 3 hours ago July 8, 2020
By Anthony Watts

Originally published at Climate Realism

Unable to win the debate in the court of public opinion, climate activists are increasingly calling for the imprisonment of climate realists. The latest example is an article in The Carbon Brief titled “How climate change misinformation spreads online.” The authors, who are all University of Exeter professors, advocate fines and imprisonment for people publishing “climate misinformation” online. They justify their call for imprisonment by claiming tremendous harm from “misleading information that is created and spread with intent to deceive.”

That’s one take, another take is that those who publish what the Left deems as “misinformation” are actually publishing what might be dubbed “inconvenient truths.” The 2006 film by Al Gore of the same name is a case in point. Gore, not being particularly good at details, published a boatload of misinformation in that film, and social media responded to correct the record. In one scene Gore used an animated clip of a polar bear in danger of drowning, trying to get onto a tiny ice flow made smaller, presumably by global warming. Gore cited this as the new normal of drowning polar bears. The reality? Scientists documented one drowned polar bear at sea after an intense storm, something that hasn’t been seen since. According to an Associated Press article:

LINK

=====

The Authors are all PHDrs, also more evidence that people with PHD's can still be wrong and be an idiot too.

Meanwhile there have been plenty of evidence over the years that warmists/alarmists DELIBERATELY lie and deceive people over climate claims.

 

[Mac-7]

They are political freaks who do not believe in free speech

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Another evidence that warmist/alarmists don't give a dam about that pesky first amendment.

Watts Up With That?

Climate Activists Step Up Calls for Imprisoning Climate Realists

Anthony Watts / 3 hours ago July 8, 2020
By Anthony Watts

Originally published at Climate Realism

Unable to win the debate in the court of public opinion, climate activists are increasingly calling for the imprisonment of climate realists. The latest example is an article in The Carbon Brief titled “How climate change misinformation spreads online.” The authors, who are all University of Exeter professors, advocate fines and imprisonment for people publishing “climate misinformation” online. They justify their call for imprisonment by claiming tremendous harm from “misleading information that is created and spread with intent to deceive.”

That’s one take, another take is that those who publish what the Left deems as “misinformation” are actually publishing what might be dubbed “inconvenient truths.” The 2006 film by Al Gore of the same name is a case in point. Gore, not being particularly good at details, published a boatload of misinformation in that film, and social media responded to correct the record. In one scene Gore used an animated clip of a polar bear in danger of drowning, trying to get onto a tiny ice flow made smaller, presumably by global warming. Gore cited this as the new normal of drowning polar bears. The reality? Scientists documented one drowned polar bear at sea after an intense storm, something that hasn’t been seen since. According to an Associated Press article:

LINK

=====

The Authors are all PHDrs, also more evidence that people with PHD's can still be wrong and be an idiot too.

Meanwhile there have been plenty of evidence over the years that warmists/alarmists DELIBERATELY lie and deceive people over climate claims.

I wonder if they're butthurt over Michael Mann's legal setbacks?

 

[Sunsettommy]

Another evidence that warmist/alarmists don't give a dam about that pesky first amendment.

Watts Up With That?

Climate Activists Step Up Calls for Imprisoning Climate Realists

Anthony Watts / 3 hours ago July 8, 2020
By Anthony Watts

Originally published at Climate Realism

Unable to win the debate in the court of public opinion, climate activists are increasingly calling for the imprisonment of climate realists. The latest example is an article in The Carbon Brief titled “How climate change misinformation spreads online.” The authors, who are all University of Exeter professors, advocate fines and imprisonment for people publishing “climate misinformation” online. They justify their call for imprisonment by claiming tremendous harm from “misleading information that is created and spread with intent to deceive.”

That’s one take, another take is that those who publish what the Left deems as “misinformation” are actually publishing what might be dubbed “inconvenient truths.” The 2006 film by Al Gore of the same name is a case in point. Gore, not being particularly good at details, published a boatload of misinformation in that film, and social media responded to correct the record. In one scene Gore used an animated clip of a polar bear in danger of drowning, trying to get onto a tiny ice flow made smaller, presumably by global warming. Gore cited this as the new normal of drowning polar bears. The reality? Scientists documented one drowned polar bear at sea after an intense storm, something that hasn’t been seen since. According to an Associated Press article:

LINK

=====

The Authors are all PHDrs, also more evidence that people with PHD's can still be wrong and be an idiot too.

Meanwhile there have been plenty of evidence over the years that warmists/alarmists DELIBERATELY lie and deceive people over climate claims.

I wonder if they're butthurt over Michael Mann's legal setbacks?

For your reading pleasure:

Steyn Online

The Costs of Mann Delay
or Michael E Mann, Loser (Again) and Deadbeat (for Sure)
The War on Free Speech
June 23, 2020

Excerpt:

The Mann vs Steyn case is about to enter its ninth year in the choked septic tank of the District of Columbia (pending name change) "judicial" system. Yet oddly enough the Covid lockdown of every other courthouse on the planet has coincided with a modest acceleration in the progress of the global warm-monger's vanity litigation.

For those new to this suit, there's a whole book about it. But as I summarized it the other day:

Mann is the climate ayatollah who created the global-warming hockey stick showing that nothing of any interest happened in the world's climate until a little over a century ago, at which point your great-grampa climbed into his Model T and the world started to burn. The hockey stick is total bollocks, but it was taken up by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and in the early years of this millennium was the single most influential graph of our time.

Many climate scientists other than hardcore Mann-boys are embarrassed by the prominence given to the hockey stick. But Mann has to protect his increasingly flaccid stick, and so he began launching various vanity lawsuits.

LINK

=====

The hypocritical jerk is refusing to comply with the court order to pay the court costs.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Another evidence that warmist/alarmists don't give a dam about that pesky first amendment.

Watts Up With That?

Climate Activists Step Up Calls for Imprisoning Climate Realists

Anthony Watts / 3 hours ago July 8, 2020
By Anthony Watts

Originally published at Climate Realism

Unable to win the debate in the court of public opinion, climate activists are increasingly calling for the imprisonment of climate realists. The latest example is an article in The Carbon Brief titled “How climate change misinformation spreads online.” The authors, who are all University of Exeter professors, advocate fines and imprisonment for people publishing “climate misinformation” online. They justify their call for imprisonment by claiming tremendous harm from “misleading information that is created and spread with intent to deceive.”

That’s one take, another take is that those who publish what the Left deems as “misinformation” are actually publishing what might be dubbed “inconvenient truths.” The 2006 film by Al Gore of the same name is a case in point. Gore, not being particularly good at details, published a boatload of misinformation in that film, and social media responded to correct the record. In one scene Gore used an animated clip of a polar bear in danger of drowning, trying to get onto a tiny ice flow made smaller, presumably by global warming. Gore cited this as the new normal of drowning polar bears. The reality? Scientists documented one drowned polar bear at sea after an intense storm, something that hasn’t been seen since. According to an Associated Press article:

LINK

=====

The Authors are all PHDrs, also more evidence that people with PHD's can still be wrong and be an idiot too.

Meanwhile there have been plenty of evidence over the years that warmists/alarmists DELIBERATELY lie and deceive people over climate claims.

I wonder if they're butthurt over Michael Mann's legal setbacks?

For your reading pleasure:

Steyn Online

The Costs of Mann Delay
or Michael E Mann, Loser (Again) and Deadbeat (for Sure)
The War on Free Speech
June 23, 2020

Excerpt:

The Mann vs Steyn case is about to enter its ninth year in the choked septic tank of the District of Columbia (pending name change) "judicial" system. Yet oddly enough the Covid lockdown of every other courthouse on the planet has coincided with a modest acceleration in the progress of the global warm-monger's vanity litigation.

For those new to this suit, there's a whole book about it. But as I summarized it the other day:

Mann is the climate ayatollah who created the global-warming hockey stick showing that nothing of any interest happened in the world's climate until a little over a century ago, at which point your great-grampa climbed into his Model T and the world started to burn. The hockey stick is total bollocks, but it was taken up by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and in the early years of this millennium was the single most influential graph of our time.

Many climate scientists other than hardcore Mann-boys are embarrassed by the prominence given to the hockey stick. But Mann has to protect his increasingly flaccid stick, and so he began launching various vanity lawsuits.

LINK

=====

The hypocritical jerk is refusing to comply with the court order to pay the court costs.

I have an autographed copy of the Steyn book.

Yeah, Mann is a whiney twat for sure.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Censorship drives are still happening about 240 years after first amendment was ratified.

Facebook Accused of Allowing Climate Deniers to Promote Their Views
Eric Worrall / 3 hours ago July 8, 2020

Excerpt:

A group calling themselves climate power have demanded Facebook take a more aggressive stance against people who promote what they claim are climate lies. The signatories to their open letter include failed radical green Democrat candidate Tom Steyer, and former Clinton administration chief of staff John Podesta.

LINK

====

John Podesta and Tom Steyer, two leftist whack jobs!

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Another evidence that warmist/alarmists don't give a dam about that pesky first amendment.

Watts Up With That?

Climate Activists Step Up Calls for Imprisoning Climate Realists

Anthony Watts / 3 hours ago July 8, 2020
By Anthony Watts

Originally published at Climate Realism

Unable to win the debate in the court of public opinion, climate activists are increasingly calling for the imprisonment of climate realists. The latest example is an article in The Carbon Brief titled “How climate change misinformation spreads online.” The authors, who are all University of Exeter professors, advocate fines and imprisonment for people publishing “climate misinformation” online. They justify their call for imprisonment by claiming tremendous harm from “misleading information that is created and spread with intent to deceive.”

That’s one take, another take is that those who publish what the Left deems as “misinformation” are actually publishing what might be dubbed “inconvenient truths.” The 2006 film by Al Gore of the same name is a case in point. Gore, not being particularly good at details, published a boatload of misinformation in that film, and social media responded to correct the record. In one scene Gore used an animated clip of a polar bear in danger of drowning, trying to get onto a tiny ice flow made smaller, presumably by global warming. Gore cited this as the new normal of drowning polar bears. The reality? Scientists documented one drowned polar bear at sea after an intense storm, something that hasn’t been seen since. According to an Associated Press article:

LINK

=====

The Authors are all PHDrs, also more evidence that people with PHD's can still be wrong and be an idiot too.

Meanwhile there have been plenty of evidence over the years that warmists/alarmists DELIBERATELY lie and deceive people over climate claims.

COVID is becoming eerily similar.

I am getting hyena-fucking sick of commie bullshit.

 

[mamooth]

The authors, who are all University of Exeter professors, advocate fines and imprisonment for people publishing “climate misinformation” online.

No, they didn't. Your cult just made that up. They pointed out it was a bad option.

Tommy, you're the one who _still_ wants Dr. Mann put in prison for doing science that TheParty didn't like. All deniers still want that. It's not a question of whether deniers display some Stalinist tendencies, such as their complete reliance on the BigLie technique and their fanatical desire to send any dissenters to TheGulag. It's only a question of whether deniers differ from Stalinists in any significant way. They don't.

If any denier disagrees, they need to start by condemning the other deniers and the Republican party for attempting to send Dr. Mann to prison for the crime of doing science. If they don't, then "STFU, hypocrite" will be the appropriate response to anything they say.

 

[ChemEngineer]

The hypocritical jerk (Michael Mann) is refusing to comply with the court order to pay the court costs.

Here is another common fraudulent Climate Change - Global Warming graph.

Why is it fraudulent?
1. The axis is compressed, beginning at 310 ppm. This greatly increases the slope of the graph, making it SCARY!
2. This is TOTAL carbon dioxide. Humans account for about 4% with the rest coming from decomposition of plants and animals all over the world. The implication is that humans are causing all of this increase. It is a lie.
3. Water is THE dominant greenhouse gas, at ~15,000 ppmv. It is ignored.
4. Water is a far better greenhouse gas, since it is more effective at absorbing IR radiation.

 

[Sunsettommy]

The authors, who are all University of Exeter professors, advocate fines and imprisonment for people publishing “climate misinformation” online.

No, they didn't. Your cult just made that up. They pointed out it was a bad option.

Tommy, you're the one who _still_ wants Dr. Mann put in prison for doing science that TheParty didn't like. All deniers still want that. It's not a question of whether deniers display some Stalinist tendencies, such as their complete reliance on the BigLie technique and their fanatical desire to send any dissenters to TheGulag. It's only a question of whether deniers differ from Stalinists in any significant way. They don't.

If any denier disagrees, they need to start by condemning the other deniers and the Republican party for attempting to send Dr. Mann to prison for the crime of doing science. If they don't, then "STFU, hypocrite" will be the appropriate response to anything they say.

Ha ha ha, as usual you full of crap, here is what Anthony writes, which is CORRECT:

"The latest example is an article in The Carbon Brief titled “How climate change misinformation spreads online.” The authors, who are all University of Exeter professors, advocate fines and imprisonment for people publishing “climate misinformation” online. They justify their call for imprisonment by claiming tremendous harm from “misleading information that is created and spread with intent to deceive.”

======

You didn't read the article at all, which is why as usual you are comically wrong, here is what YOU miss, from warmist/Alarmist Carbon Brief:

"What can be done about it?
Scientific literature has put forward a range of ways to counteract misinformation. Summarised in the graphic below, these broadly fall into the categories of education (purple boxes), inoculation (blue), technological solutions (green), response (orange) and regulation (red).

"A summary of the potential ways to counteract misinformation found in the literature, along with their criticisms and caveats. Credit: Treen et al. (2020)

Anthony Watts was 100% correct, you again made a FOOL of yourself which is because you DON"T read the articles!



=====

Here is another section of the article you didn't read:

"Why does it matter?
A key strategy used by the actors that spread climate change misinformation is to create doubt in people’s minds, leading to what has been described as a “paralysing fog of doubt around climate change”. There are three main themes: doubt about the reality of climate change; doubt about the urgency; and doubt about the credentials of climate scientists."

The usual lies abound here, can you guess what they are, you have been told differently many times, lets see if YOU will promote their lies as well?

 

[Sunsettommy]

Here is another foot in the mouth evidence/fact free babble from resident warmist/alarmist loon:

"Tommy, you're the one who _still_ wants Dr. Mann put in prison for doing science that TheParty didn't like. All deniers still want that. It's not a question of whether deniers display some Stalinist tendencies, such as their complete reliance on the BigLie technique and their fanatical desire to send any dissenters to TheGulag. It's only a question of whether deniers differ from Stalinists in any significant way. They don't."

===

Dr. Mann was trying to put Dr. Ball in Prison through his bullshit lawsuit, the lawsuit he lost badly, but the turd is now refusing to obey the orders of the Judge to pay up. From THIS LINK you didn't read:

"Many climate scientists other than hardcore Mann-boys are embarrassed by the prominence given to the hockey stick. But Mann has to protect his increasingly flaccid stick, and so he began launching various vanity lawsuits. This last year has not gone well for him. His suit against Tim Ball was dismissed with prejudice by the British Columbia Supreme Court for failure to prosecute, with costs awarded to Dr Ball. That's to say, Mann lost - decisively. Mann denied that that was what had happened, and his halfwit groupies seemed willing to swallow that denial of reality, but the big clue to the final scorecard is the significant six-figure check he was ordered to write to Tim Ball. The dishonorable Mann has indicated he will refuse to pay, and, being resident outside Her Majesty's Dominions, he may get away with that, or at least drag it out awhile.

[UPDATE: I speculated back in October whether Mann, a loser and a liar, would also prove a scofflaw and a deadbeat. Yes, he is. It is ten months since he lost at the BC Supreme Court and, despite Mr Justice Giaschi's order, Doctor Fraudpants has yet to pay Tim Ball a penny. So he's a fraudulent plaintiff in every respect. This scumbag has financially ruined Dr Ball, lost at trial, and refuses to pay up. Mann's conduct is appalling: it's no wonder so few climate scientists are willing to defend him.]

However, Mann has now been ordered by the District of Columbia Superior Court to write a just-shy-of-five-figure check to my co-defendants Rand Simberg and the Competitive Enterprise Institute - and for the same reasons as in BC: dragging things out and piling up additional costs on the defendants because (all together now) the process is the punishment."

===

Now that makes it TWO judges the shithead Mann is disobeying, TWO Judges he is now on record in disobeying their decision to pay up.

You seem to be in support this unlawful pile of shit.

 

[Sunsettommy]

This is what they really want, get all the skeptics (deniers) in jail, then produce a bunch of fake climate change debates (the one with no deniers in it) this is the only way they can win a debate, by excluding the other side of the debate. This is how Commies did when they want to win, kill off the opponents and declare the win!

My my, how insecure they have become, too scared to face some one far more rational then them.

Watts Up With That?

NY Times Fakes a Climate Change Debate
Kip Hansen / 17 hours ago July 12, 2020
Guest Essay by Kip Hansen – 12 July 2020

Excerpt:

The New York Times’ Climate section is a source of continuing amusement for me. This one made me laugh out loud.
In an exhibition of astounding audacity, the New York Times’ Editor of the Climate Desk, Hannah Fairfield, stages what is billed as a “debate” about moving forward with solutions to climate change.

Let me be perfectly clear, this is a fake debate – no debate takes place. Having given up the standards of professional journalism almost entirely, the Climate desk has moved on from misinformation, disinformation and fake news to . . . . Fake Debates.

LINK

 

[Gdjjr]

all University of Exeter professors

"Experts", no doubt- they probably endorse the Covid Hoax as well- ask them if the sky is blue or grass is green, if they react in the affirmative be sure to check for yourself.

 

[ChemEngineer]

Tweet her the facts. They hate facts.

 

[Gdjjr]

Tweet her the facts. They hate facts.

Who is "her"? Who is they? Which facts do you approve?

 

[Sunsettommy]

all University of Exeter professors

"Experts", no doubt- they probably endorse the Covid Hoax as well- ask them if the sky is blue or grass is green, if they react in the affirmative be sure to check for yourself.

Too many experts in history have been wrong, to just take their words for granted.

 

[mamooth]

I see that after I ran Tommy of his other thread by pointing out his Stalinist hypocrisy, he just started another thread on the same topic. So, I'll have to do it again. You know, point out what a Stalinist hypocrite Tommy is, concerning how he tried to get Dr. Mann and other climate scientists sent to the gulag for the crime of doing science. And how he has no regrets over doing so, and how he'd do it again.

Almost all the deniers here are hardcore Stalinists. They want scientists imprisoned for doing science. They'd all dearly love it if TheParty ruled absolutely. They wish they could even get non-scientists like me imprisoned for the crime of independent thinking.

Here's a summation of the ongoing denier Stalinism, which they project on to liberty-minded people as part of their BigLie technique. Their most recent attack on science isn't on climate science though, it's on medical science, with their attempts to silence and hopefully imprison Dr. Fauci. Deniers don't just try to censor climate science; they censor any science that's inconvenient to TheParty.

https://climate.law.columbia.edu/Silencing-Science-Tracker

 

[Sunsettommy]

Wikipedia likes to censor reasonable editing to make things more balanced, the replies from a Wikipedia editor "hob" a fake name, revels in restoring words that don't belong.

Watts Up With That?

Climate Wars: Try Removing the Word “Denier” from a Wikipedia Entry
Eric Worrall / 15 hours ago July 12, 2020

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Excerpt:

A few days ago Dr. Willie Soon pointed out on the social media site Parler that it is impossible to remove the term “Denier” from the Wikipedia entry for Sallie Baliunas.

I should have stated more clearly the big problem in Wiki related to William Connolley; the tyrant at Wiki

None of us can correct for the entries calling us climate change deniers: start with Robert Carter and Sallie Baliunas.
Source: Parler / Willie Soon

Baliunas’ Wikipedia description contains the line “Baliunas is a denier in regard to there being a connection between CO2 rise and climate change, saying in a 2001 essay with Willie Soon …”
So I decided to perform an experiment. As a long standing if infrequent Wikipedia editor, I updated Sallie’s Wikipedia entry to read “Baliunas disputes there being a connection between CO2 rise and climate change, saying in a 2001 essay with Willie Soon …”, and added an explanation to Sallie’s talk page (a secondary page associated with all Wikipedia pages, where people can leave comments).

Removed the word “denier”
People who dispute the connection between climate change and CO2 find the word “denier” offensive, many climate skeptics believe “climate denier” is an attempt to link the concept of disputing the consensus to “holocaust denial”. Is it really necessary to use the term “denier”? By all means describe the views of other scientists of this position, but surely it does no harm to avoid using a term which the subject of the article might take to be a deliberate antagonism.

Wikipedia editor Hob Galding (Hob admits this is a pseudonym) changed the entry back the next day, and offered the following explanation.

LINK

=====

Brainless editing decision nonsense at Wikipedia, it is the dominant reason why I would NEVER give them money.

 

[ChemEngineer]

Too many experts in history have been wrong, to just take their words for granted.

It so happens that I have been compiling a list of such words we can all laugh at. It is now five pages long. Anyone who has an addition for my Experts Wrong document, please post it here or send me a PM.

“The sun appears to be nothing else than a very eminent, large, and lucid planet…. Its similarity to the other globes of the solar system, with regard to its solidity, its atmosphere, and its diversified surface; the rotation upon its axis,and the fall of heavy bodies leads us on to suppose that it is most probably inhabited, like the rest of the planets, by beings whose organs are adapted to the peculiar circumstances of that vast globe.” – William Herschel (1738-1822) , discoverer of the planet Uranus, eminent observer and builder of telescopes


"We have been cocksure of many things that were not so." - Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.


"This isn't right, this isn't even wrong." - Wolfgang Pauli


"Rail travel at high speed is not possible, because passengers, unable to breathe, would die of asphyxia."- Dr Dionysys Larder (1793-1859), professor of Natural Philosophy and Astronomy, University College London.


Drill for oil? You mean drill into the ground to try and find oil? You're crazy," -- Drillers who Edwin L. Drake tried to enlist to his project to drill for oil in 1859.


"Louis Pasteur's theory of germs is ridiculous fiction." -- Pierre Pachet, Professor of Physiology at Toulouse, 1872

"The abdomen, the chest, and the brain will forever be shut from the intrusion of the wise and humane surgeon," -- Sir John Eric Ericksen, British surgeon, appointed Surgeon-Extraordinary to Queen Victoria 1873


"This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a means of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us," -- Western Union internal memo, 1876


"The Americans have need of the telephone, but we do not. We have plenty of messenger boys." - Sir William Preece, Chief Engineer, British Post Office, 1878.

... good enough for our transatlantic friends ... but unworthy of the attention of practical or scientific men. - British Parliamentary Committee, referring to Edison's light bulb, 1878.


“The evidence for the existence of the luminiferous ether has accumulated as additional phenomena of light and other radiations have been discovered; and the properties of this medium, as deduced from the phenomena of light, have been found to be precisely those required to explain electromagnetic phenomena.” - James Clerk Maxwell (1831-1879)

"X-rays will prove to be a hoax." - Lord Kelvin, President of the Royal Society, 1883

"Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible," -- Lord Kelvin, president, Royal Society, 1895.


"It is apparent to me that the possibilities of the aeroplane, which two or three years ago were thought to hold the solution to the [flying machine] problem, have been exhausted, and that we must turn elsewhere."- Thomas Edison, American inventor, 1895.


"Fooling around with alternating current is just a waste of time. Nobody will use it, ever." - Thomas Edison, American inventor, 1889 (Edison often ridiculed the arguments of competitor George Westinghouse for AC power).


"Radio has no future." - Lord Kelvin, Scottish mathematician and physicist, former president of the Royal Society, 1897


"Everything that can be invented has been invented." - Charles H. Duell, Commissioner, U.S. Office of Patents, 1899


"Airplanes are interesting toys but of no military value," -- Marechal Ferdinand Foch, Professor of Strategy, Ecole Superieure de Guerre, 1904


"That the automobile has practically reached the limit of its development is suggested by the fact that during the past year no improvements of a radical nature have been introduced."- Scientific American, Jan. 2 edition, 1909


HMS Titanic was doing 22 knots at night in known iceberg fields when it struck a glancing blow and sunk four hours later. Captain Edward Smith was the most experienced ocean liner Commodore in the world when he went down with 1,511 passengers and crew on April 12, 1912.


"The wireless music box has no imaginable commercial value. Who would pay for a message sent to nobody in particular?" -- David Sarnoff's associates in response to his urgings for investment in the radio in the 1920s.


"Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?" - H. M. Warner (1881-1958), founder of Warner Brothers, in 1927

"There is no likelihood man can ever tap the power of the atom." -- Robert Millikan, Nobel Prize in Physics, 1923

"Stocks have reached what looks like a permanently high plateau." -- Irving Fisher, Professor of Economics, Yale University, 1929.

"There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever be obtainable. It would mean that the atom would have to be shattered at will."- Albert Einstein, 1932.

"I'm just glad it'll be Clark Gable who's falling on his face and not Gary Cooper," - Gary Cooper on his decision not to take the leading role in "Gone With The Wind."


"The energy produced by the breaking down of the atom is a very poor kind of thing. Anyone who expects a source of power from the transformation of these atoms is talking moonshine." - Ernest Rutherford, shortly after splitting the atom for the first time.

"Gentlemen we cannot lose now, for on our side is an empire that has not lost a war in 3000 years of history." – Adolf Hitler after December 7, 1941


"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." - Thomas Watson (1874-1956), Chairman of IBM, 1943


"Man will never reach the moon regardless of all future scientific advances." -- Dr. Lee DeForest, Inventor of TV

"The bomb will never go off. I speak as an expert in explosives." -- Admiral William Leahy, US Atomic Bomb Project, advising President Truman on atomic weaponry, 1944.


"Very interesting Whittle, my boy, but it will never work."- Cambridge Aeronautics Professor, when shown Frank Whittle's plan for the jet engine.


"Computers in the future may weigh no more than 1.5 tons." -- Popular Mechanics, forecasting the relentless march of science, 1949

"It will be gone by June." - Variety newspaper, passing judgment on rock 'n roll in 1955.

"Space travel is utter bilge." - Richard Van Der Riet Woolley, upon assuming the post of Astronomer Royal in 1956.

"I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people, and I can assure you that data processing is a fad that won't last out the year." -- The editor in charge of business books for Prentice Hall, 1957

"Space travel is bunk." - Sir Harold Spencer Jones, Astronomer Royal of the UK, 1957 (two weeks later Sputnik orbited the Earth).

"There will never be a bigger plane built." - A Boeing engineer, after the first flight of the 247, a twin engine plane that holds ten people.

"We stand on the threshold of rocket mail." -– U.S. postmaster general Arthur Summerfield, in 1959.

"The concept is interesting and well-formed, but in order to earn better than a 'C,' the idea must be feasible," -- A Yale University management professor in response to Fred Smith's paper proposing reliable overnight delivery service. (Smith went on to found Federal Express Corp.)

"A cookie store is a bad idea. Besides, the market research reports say America likes crispy cookies, not soft and chewy cookies like you make," -- Response to Debbi Fields' idea of starting Mrs. Fields' Cookies.

"We don't like their sound, and guitar music is on the way out," -- Decca Recording Co. rejecting the Beatles, 1962.

"Transmission of documents via telephone wires is possible in principle, but the apparatus required is so expensive that it will never become a practical proposition."- Dennis Gabor, British physicist and author of Inventing the Future, 1962.

"There is practically no chance communications space satellites will be used to provide better telephone, telegraph, television, or radio service inside the United States."- T. Craven, FCC Commissioner, in 1961 (the first commercial communications satellite went into service in 1965).

"But what ... is it good for?" -- Engineer Robert Lloyd at the Advanced Computing Systems Division of IBM, 1968, commenting on the microchip.


"If I had thought about it, I wouldn't have done the experiment. The literature was full of examples that said you can't do this," -- Spencer Silver on the work that led to the unique adhesives for 3-M "Post-It" Notepads

"The super computer is technologically impossible. It would take all of the water that flows over Niagara Falls to cool the heat generated by the number of vacuum tubes required." -- professor of electrical engineering, New York University

"I don't know what use any one could find for a machine that would make copies of documents. It certainly couldn't be a feasible business by itself." -- the head of IBM, refusing to back the idea, forcing the inventor to found Xerox

"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home." -- Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of Digital Equipment Corp., 1977


Jacob Van Zanten was KLM Airline’s senior pilot and instructor when he began his takeoff roll on Tenerife Island without clearance, crashing into TWA Flight 1736 at Los Rodeos Airport, resulting in 583 fatalities, the deadliest in aviation history. – March 27, 1977

"Religion and science are separate and mutually exclusive realms of human thought." -The National Academy of Sciences, 1981 [But the Big Bang can only be understood as a “miracle.” – Allan Sandage, one of the leading astronomers of the world]

 

[ChemEngineer]

I see that after I ran Tommy of his other thread by pointing out his Stalinist hypocrisy, he just started another thread on the same topic. So, I'll have to do it again. You know, point out what a Stalinist hypocrite Tommy is, concerning how he tried to get Dr. Mann and other climate scientists sent to the gulag for the crime of doing science. And how he has no regrets over doing so, and how he'd do it again.

Almost all the deniers here are hardcore Stalinists. They want scientists imprisoned for doing science. They'd all dearly love it if TheParty ruled absolutely. They wish they could even get non-scientists like me imprisoned for the crime of independent thinking.

You? "Independent thinking"? What a laugh. Mann fabricated his data and for that reason, refused the court order to turn over his raw scientific data in a lawsuit. He is a charlatan and you call him a "scientist." About like Al Gore is a "scientist."

theglobalwarmingfraud

TheGlobalWarmingFraud.wordpress.com

Dr. Willie Soon's lecture can be seen therein, along with many others, including Nobel Laureate in Physics, Ivar Giaever, who also rejects the Climate Change Fraud.

The Keeling Curve Fraud along should be enough to convince any thinking person of AlGorian lies and misrepresentations which are costing taxpayers trillions of dollars around the globe. Not that the Climate Change Sharia cares one bit.....