‘The Climate Mafia Rewrites Science History’: ‘RICO statute was passed to fight the mafia. Now it’s being used by the climate mafia to silence dissent’
http://www.thegwpf.com/rupert-darwall-the-climate-mafia-rewrites-science-history/
The belief that to reject climate catastrophism (aka climate denial) constitutes a moral failing is a hallmark of pseudoscience – See more at: http://www.thegwpf.com/rupert-darwall-the-climate-mafia-rewrites-science-history/#sthash.iafFb5JB.dpuf
Scientists were able to prove the threat to health from smoking because there is a very strong statistical relationship between smoking and lung cancer. The strength of those initial findings was further validated by passing a tough predictive test. In 1953, Richard Doll, one of the first researchers to have found the link, predicted that in 1973 there would be 25,000 lung-cancer deaths in Britain. In fact, there were 26,000. By contrast, climate models have been systematically over-forecasting temperature rises this century, demonstrating that climate scientists know much less about the climate system than they would have us believe. In the New York Times, Oreskes complains that climate scientists are ridiculed for predicting catastrophic climate change. If climate scientists’ predictions had been more accurate, they might be taken seriously.
Climate activists have highlighted the history of research on tobacco smoking and lung cancer not to illustrate the weakness of climate science compared with the epidemiology of lung cancer, but to intimidate those who disagree with them and close down debate. Last month, 20 climate scientists wrote to President Obama requesting that the government use the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) to bypass Congress and, they hope, muzzle dissenting views. Perhaps it is not a coincidence that the letter’s organizer, Jagadish Shukla of George Mason University, and his family have been doing very well indeed out of federal research dollars, reaping more than $1 million in 2014 alone.
– See more at: http://www.thegwpf.com/rupert-darwall-the-climate-mafia-rewrites-science-history/#sthash.iafFb5JB.dpuf…
Judges plan to outlaw climate change ‘denial’
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/11924776/Judges-plan-to-outlaw-climate-change-denial.html…
WSJ: ‘Shut Up—Or We’ll Shut You Down’ – RICO 20 want to shut down climate debate
http://www.wsj.com/articles/shut-upor-well-shut-you-down-1444429915…
These 20 Academics Think You Should Be Prosecuted.
Climatologist Dr. Tim Ball: ‘Environmentalists Are The New Puritans: Religious Bullies’
Environmentalists Are The New Puritans: Religious Bullies.
http://drtimball.com/2015/environmentalists-are-the-new-puritans-religious-bullies/
This article first appeared on The Rebel website. Religion is fine, but problems begin when it is forced on others. Proselytizing is the characteristic of Puritanism, which H. L. Mencken defined as, “the haunting fear that someone, somewhere is having a good time.” Mencken’s quote applied to traditional religious extremists but is equally applicable to […]
— gReader Pro…
Science Mag.: Climate scientist requesting federal investigation feels heat from House Republicans
A scientist who helped organize a call for a federal investigation of the fossil fuel industry—for allegedly orchestrating a cover-up of climate change dangers—has himself become the target of a congressional probe.
Last week, Representative Lamar Smith (R–TX), the chairman of the science panel of the House of Representatives, announced plans to investigate a nonprofit research group led by climate scientist Jagadish Shukla of George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia. He is the lead signer of a letter to White House officials that urges the use of an antiracketeering law to crack down on energy firms that have funded efforts to raise doubts about climate science.…
Top International Lawyer: Make Climate Change Illegal And Silence Skeptics Forever
6 Oct 2015
Climate change is such a pressing, dangerous and universal threat that it should be made illegal under international law, a top barrister has told a conference of leading lawyers in London.
Philippe Sands QC, an international law specialist and Professor of Law at University College London, argued that the UN’s International Court of Justice (ICJ) should make it an “obligation under international law” to ensure that global temperatures never rise more than 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.
…
That target, they clearly aren’t aware, has no serious scientific basis. It was the invention of one man – German left-wing activist Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) – who himself admits that he plucked the figure from the air for political reasons at the height of the climate scare in the mid-1990s.
“Two degrees is not a magical limit — it’s clearly a political goal,” says Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK). “The world will not come to an end right away in the event of stronger warming, nor are we definitely saved if warming is not as significant. The reality, of course, is much more complicated.”
In other words were that arbitrary limit to be exceeded, it is entirely possible that the benefits would far outweigh the disadvantages. But even if they didn’t, there’s absolutely no point in trying to legislate to prevent it happening because, as has become abundantly clear after the last couple of decades’ intense study, the ability of humans to alter the climate in any significant way is minimal.…
Walter Williams: ‘Suppressing Free Speech’: ‘The global warming agenda is a desperate effort to gain greater control over our lives’
http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/walter-e-williams/suppressing-free-speech
My university, at which I’ve toiled for 35 years, has a political makeup like that of most other universities — middle of the road to liberal/progressive. What distinguishes my liberal/progressive colleagues is that they are courteous and civilized, unlike many of those at universities such as the University of Massachusetts and the University of California, Berkeley.
So I investigated this call for the use of RICO, or the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. It turns out that Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., has called for the criminal investigation of people and organizations who are seen as global warming deniers.…
Climate Alarmist ‘Largest Science Scandal in U.S. History’
Smith has two main areas of concern.
First, the apparent engagement by the institute in “partisan political activity” – which, as a non-profit, it is forbidden by law from doing.
Second, what precisely has the IGES institute done with the $63 million in taxpayer grants which it has received since 2001 and which appears to have resulted in remarkably little published research?
For example, as Watts Up With That? notes, a $4.2 million grant from the National Science Foundation to one of the institute’s offshoots appears to have resulted in just one published paper.
But the amount which has gone into the pockets of Shukla and his cronies runs into the many hundreds of thousands of dollars. In 2013 and 2014, for example, Shukla and his wife enjoyed a combined income in excess of $800,000 a year.
Steve McIntyre, the investigator who shattered Michael Mann’s global-warming ‘Hockey Stick’ claim, has done a detailed breakdown of the sums involved. He calls it Shukla’s Gold.…
Who’s Behind The Campaign to Bring RICO Charges Against ‘Climate Skeptics?’
In sending the letter to President Obama demanding transparency among “climate skeptics,” a well-known professor in the global climate movement may have exposed his own questionable handling of finances. Rep. Lamar Alexander has promised to “get to the bottom” of the interrelationship between IGES, Shukla’s work (both public and academic), and how taxpayers might have inadvertently funded some things they didn’t expect to. The results should be very interesting.…