Warmist Michael Mann on ‘Professional climate smearmonger Marc Morano’
…
Update: Scientist leading effort to prosecute climate skeptics under RICO ‘paid himself & his wife $1.5 million from govt climate grants for part-time work’
Climate Depot Special Report
The letter by global warming scientists calling on President Obama to look into prosecuting climate skeptics has prompted international outcry. See: Debate no more! Jailed for scientific dissent?! Twenty climate scientists, including Top UN scientist, call for RICO investigation of climate skeptics in letter to Obama (Also see: Mike Shellenberger takes down the ‘The Exxon Climate Denial Myth’ – Exxon in ‘many cases advocated for climate policy!’)
The uproar over the to effort to enact racketeering charges against those who disagree with the view of dangerous man-made global warming has just added a new twist.
Dr. Roger Pielke Jr., professor of environmental studies at the Center for Science and Technology Policy Research at the University of Colorado at Boulder, has revealed the leader of the RICO 20 is a prime example of a climate profiteer.
George Mason University Professor of Climate Dynamics Jagadish Shukla, is identified by Pielke Jr. as the man who spearheaded the letter demanding RICO investigation by the Obama Administration. Shukla was also a Lead Author with the UN IPCC in 2007. In 2010, there was speculation that Shukla might become the next Chair of the UN IPCC. See: ‘WILL JAGADISH SHUKLA BECOME A NEW CHAIRMAN OF IPCC’
[email protected] or [email protected]
Shukla, the “leader of RICO20 climate scientists runs his government grants through a ‘non-profit’,” Pielke Jr. wrote on September 20 on Tweeter.
Prof. Shukla is listed as the “President” of “Institute of Global Environment & Society, Inc.” in the 2014 990 forms.
The group “pays him and wife $500,000 per year for part-time work,” Pielke Jr. revealed. He also provided a link to Guide Star with the supporting information.
Pielke Jr. continued: “From 2012-2014, the Leader of RICO 20 climate scientists paid himself and his wife $1.5 million from government climate grants for part-time work. Shukla’s wife Anne Shukla is listed as the groups “business manager” in the IRS forms.
Anne Shukla’s email: [email protected]
“The $350,000-$400,000 per year paid leader of the RICO20 from his ‘non-profit’ was presumably on top of his $250,000 per year academic salary,” Pielke wrote. “That totals to $750,000 per year to the leader of the RICO20 from public money for climate work and going after skeptics. Good work if you can get it,” Pielke Jr. added.
Pielke Jr. concluded his research by writing: “Investigative reporters, you are …
One of 20 Scientists Who Signed RICO Proposal Insists ‘No one is trying to throw anyone in jail’
http://mason.gmu.edu/~bklinger/rico.html
George Mason University’s Barry A. Klinger:
Do we think that climate change is settled science? Should climate contrarians have free speech?
First question: no. Second question: yes.
I think there are many open questions regarding global warming. See A Skeptics Guide to Global Warming for a discussion of “settled science.” In general, scientists, policy experts, and interested citizens should be free to say whatever they want, even if they disagree with me and even if they disagree with most scientists in their field.
A RICO suit like the one we propose would be very narrowly focussed on whether companies were engaged in fraud in order to continue selling a product which threatens to do harm. I’m not a legal expert, but I think that anyone not selling a product or service can not be punished for fraud, so the vast majority of people opining on climate are not even theoretically threatened by such a case. Even for an oil company, the standard for finding fraud is quite high. According to the RICO judgement against the tobacco companies:
Generally, a plaintiff must prove five elements by “clear and convincing evidence” to prevail on a fraud claim. See e.g., Armstrong v Accrediting Council Continuing Educ. & Training, Inc., 961 F. Supp. 305, 309 (D.D.C. 1997). They are: (1) a false representation, (2) in reference to a material fact, (3) made with the knowledge of its falsity, (4) with the intent to deceive, and (5) on which action is taken in reliance upon the representation. ( p. 1564)
What do we want to do to climate contrarians?
No one is trying to throw anyone in jail. If I understand the case correctly, the final outcome of the judgement against tobacco companies was to order them to stop denying known harms of smoking and to publicize the falsity of their fraudulent statements. I expect that a case against fossil fuel companies, if it ever did prove fraud, would result in a similar judgement.…
Arrest Those Climate Skeptics!
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/09/arrest-those-climate-skeptics.php…
OMG I’m Going To Jail! Climate Gurus Want Obama To Throw Skeptics In The Pokey
OMG I’m Going To Jail! Climate Gurus Want Obama To Throw Skeptics In The Pokey
OMG I’m Going To Jail! I hope they don’t put me in a cell next to Hillary Clinton. In a letter to President Obama, Attorney General Lynch, and OSTP Director Holdren, UN IPCC Lead Author Kevin Trenberth and 19 other climate: scientists asked President Obama to have the thought police put climate skeptics in the pokey. “We appreciate that you are making aggressive and imaginative use of the limited tools available to you in the face of a recalcitrant Congress. One additional tool – recently proposed by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) – is a RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) investigation of corporations and other organizations that have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change, as a means to forestall America’s response to climate change. We strongly endorse Senator Whitehouse’s call for a RICO investigation.” No really, this is not a joke–Senator Whitehouse who never met a freedom he didn’t want to take away and 20 of his climate friends want the thought police to charge climate skeptics using the exact same RICO statute that sent John Gotti to jail for life. Now granted I was in Sparks Restaurant the same day that Paulie Castellano got whacked, but I was there for lunch, Paulie took a bullet dinner time when I was on the subway heading home. This isn’t the first UN-American act by a member of congress who drank the climate change Kool-aid. Back in March the National Journal covered the case of a crazy Democratic Party congressman from Arizona who wanted to look at the mail of university professors who didn’t buy the climate change hypothesis. A prominent Democrat probing outside funding for seven university professors who stake out skeptical or controversial positions on climate change said his request for their correspondence with funders and others was an “overreach.” But Rep. Raul Grijalva is also strongly defending his search for ties between fossil-fuel interests and climate research against charges that it’s a “witch hunt,” arguing that the thrust of the inquiry is aimed at providing important disclosures. The Arizona Democrat sent letters last week to seven universities seeking information on the sources and amounts of external funding for research, consulting, travel, and more. The letters also broadly asked for “communication” regarding the funding, and communication related to …
RICO Skeptics: Silencing Dissent Via the Police – No Climate Free Speech
World court should rule on climate science to quash skeptics, says Law Prof. Philippe Sands
Sands, a professor of international law at University College London and author of influential books on the Iraq war and interrogation techniques at Guantánamo Bay, said that failure to act on climate change would lead to an even bigger European refugee crisis than today’s.
…
“A finding of fact on one or more of these matters [such as whether climate change is man-made], or indeed on other pertinent matters, would be significant and authoritative and could well be dispositive on a range of future actions, including negotiations.” Scientifically-settled questions such as whether climate change is even happening are still being challenged by “scientifically qualified, knowledgeable and influential persons”, he said.
…
Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics
Arizona Democratic Rep. Raul Grijalva went after universities employing these researchers, which resulted in one expert being forced to get out of the field of climate research altogether.
“I am simply not initiating any new research or papers on the topic and I have ring-fenced my slowly diminishing blogging on the subject,” Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. of the University of Colorado wrote on his blog.
“Congressman Grijalva doesn’t have any evidence of any wrongdoing on my part, either ethical or legal, because there is none,” Pielke wrote. “He simply disagrees with the substance of my testimony – which is based on peer-reviewed research funded by the US taxpayer, and which also happens to be the consensus of the IPCC (despite Holdren’s incorrect views).”
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2015/09/17/scientists-ask-obama-to-prosecute-global-warming-skeptics/#ixzz3m66F4nUJ…
Physicist Dr. Lubos Motl: RICO: IPCC and comrades may be prosecuted for racketeering
Does it make any sense to try to prosecute climate skeptics by referring to RICO? The answer is obviously No. They are not racketeering, they are not influenced, they are not corrupt, and they are not even an organization in any sense. However, someone else could be tried as a violator of the RICO act.
Just think about it: Which people are grouped in organizations that corrupt others? Which group of people has received over $50 billions for having done nothing useful because this group has been connected?…
Global warming promoters: Use RICO on critics – ‘Letter to Obama suggests possible jail for opponents of climate agenda’
http://mobile.wnd.com/2015/09/global-warming-promoters-use-rico-on-critics/#I24hkP1p74zSzSW6.99
Climate expert Marc Morano at Climate Depot said such threats weren’t new.
Morano cited Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s threat to “jail” his opponents, accusing the Koch brothers of “treason” over the issue.
The “warmist” Gawker website, Morano pointed out, wrote: “Arrest Climate-Change Deniers.”
In 2009, he noted, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman accused congressmen who voted against climate cap-and-trade bill of “treason against the planet.”
The threats have been more that just for legal prosecution and punishment, Morano reported.
“On June 5, 2009, Joe Romm of Climate Progress defended a posting on his website warning that climate skeptics would be strangled in bed for rejecting the view that we face a man-made climate crisis,” Climate Depot reported. “‘An entire generation will soon be ready to strangle you and your kind while you sleep in your beds,’ warned the message posted on Climate Progress,” he wrote.
Romm later insisted it was “not a threat but a prediction,” Climate Depot said.
Climate Depot posted: “The warmists have it exactly backwards. It is the global warming proponents who are guilty of the tobacco tactics.”
Read more at http://mobile.wnd.com/2015/09/global-warming-promoters-use-rico-on-critics/#1aQqmYmcBgxYBVkd.99…