Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Climate scientists refuse to debate global warming ‘skeptics’ in the media
daily caller ^ | 3/24/2014 | Michael Bastasch

Posted on 03/24/2014 6:40:57 AM PDT by rktman

Climate scientists and environmentalists are venting their frustrations debating those who are skeptical of man-made global warming — and some have even gone so far as to refuse debating skeptics.

(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Conspiracy; Society; Weather
KEYWORDS: algorisms; ecowackos; gangreen
In a haughty tone: "What's the point in discussing ANYTHING with these ignorant skeptic fools? There is absolutely no logic or reasoning in their so called protests/arguments. It's an utter waste of time to engage in any dialogue with them.".

Sounds putry familiar to just about any subject the radical leftwing extremist dimokkkrat scumbags refuse to "debate" with reasonable, logical persons. "They" know best and will let you know what your opinion is if and when they ask for it.

1 posted on 03/24/2014 6:40:57 AM PDT by rktman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: rktman

Right out of Atlas Shrugged. “Well, if you don’t already KNOW, I just can’t explain it to you”.


2 posted on 03/24/2014 6:43:04 AM PDT by jdsteel (Give me freedom, not more government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman

Y’see, the debate would be massive, and the warmists don’t want the public to know what excellent mass debaters they are.


3 posted on 03/24/2014 6:45:23 AM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman

Leftists never want to debate the merits or the truth of their “issues”,

they simply seek to ELIMINATE their opposition.

They aren’t interested in the truth so much as they are in advancing an agenda.


4 posted on 03/24/2014 6:46:19 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman

And those of us who are actually proficient in math and physics know why.


5 posted on 03/24/2014 6:48:53 AM PDT by Da Coyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman

Of course they don’t want public debates. Showing them pictures of the artic all froze up goes against their profuse statements that the artic ice would be all gone by last summer.


6 posted on 03/24/2014 6:54:33 AM PDT by CodeToad (Keeping whites from talking about blacks is verbal segregation!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman

More and more, I hope the skeptics start compiling criminal cases of science fraud against the hucksters. Not just to punish them, but to prevent such schemes in the future.

In the 1970s, the science fraud, butterfly expert, Paul R. Ehrlich and his wife wrote a hysterical Malthusian screed called “The Population Bomb”, screaming that human reproduction in the entire world must be brought under tight government control, and that all natural resources are in shortage and must be rationed by the government.

And when his predictions of global collapse in the 1980s failed utterly, *no one* called him on it. He did not spend a day in prison for his public panic, and millions of dollars spent by governments to address his demands. And importantly, even today, he is still honored and respected by *the same people* who advance the man made global warming hysteria.

Had Ehrlich and his cronies wore prison pajamas for at least 10 years each, much of the MMGW nonsense would be far more muted.

And my point is that, unless the MMGW crowd are *punished* for wasting *billions* of dollars to establish their one-world dictatorial totalitarian regime, they won’t stop.

In 20 years or so, they will be back with yet another scam, and a factor again larger than MMGW, which itself was a factor larger than the population crisis b.s.

They must be stopped. And the only way to stop them is to make them pay for their crimes against society, the taxpayers, and freedom and liberty.

These scoundrels need prison time, and it is up to the skeptics to insure they get it. They should at a minimum be stripped of their academic credentials, what they wrote should be disavowed and pulled from publication, and they should have to pay back the vast sums of government money they were given under false pretenses.

And then they need to spend time in prison to contemplate the error of their ways.


7 posted on 03/24/2014 6:56:04 AM PDT by yefragetuwrabrumuy (WoT News: Rantburg.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe

Well if debate doesn’t work why don’t we just bring it in a court of law where facts are weighed. Any one found profiting from lies and false data should be incarcerated. Fair enough?


8 posted on 03/24/2014 7:53:49 AM PDT by spudville
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: yefragetuwrabrumuy

You put it very well. I should read the replies before I post. I seem to always find some one who has beat me to the punch with my same thoughts and they express them far better than I.


9 posted on 03/24/2014 7:58:26 AM PDT by spudville
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: rktman

If any of their computer-generated, worst case scenario models were starting to pan out these people would be more than happy to debate AGW skeptics.


10 posted on 03/24/2014 8:01:45 AM PDT by GSWarrior
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe

That is what they mean when the say “the debate is over”; they won’t debate they will just silence the opposition.


11 posted on 03/24/2014 8:14:49 AM PDT by logic101.net (How many more children must die on the altar of gun control?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: yefragetuwrabrumuy
And when his predictions of global collapse in the 1980s failed utterly, *no one* called him on it

Julian Simon did he won a bet with Erlich about several key commodities that proved Erlich was full of it. But Agree that Erlich never suffered any academic or political consequences of being so wrong - if you're a socialist/communist/green you're immune from social or political retribution.

12 posted on 03/24/2014 8:15:13 AM PDT by Timocrat (Ingnorantia non excusat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: rktman
 photo LanguageGREENMotivesRED2_zpsa053de7e.jpg
13 posted on 03/24/2014 9:09:00 AM PDT by HotHunt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HotHunt

Maybe it would have been more appropriate to use a “$” behind the word green since we all know that’s what it’s always about. Hey algore. Can you say cha ching baby?


14 posted on 03/24/2014 9:12:28 AM PDT by rktman (Ethnicity: Redneck. Race: Daytona 500)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: logic101.net
They may try to silence formal opposition, but really, how many people already ridicule the concept?

When it snows (happens frequently here in North Dakota) it's just some more of that "global warming".

People digging their car out: "Where the $^^%#% is all the Global Warming we're supposed to get?"

You don't need a PhD to spot BS.

15 posted on 03/24/2014 9:24:11 AM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: spudville
I wouldn't mind prosecuting those who have profited from fraud. However, there are limits to that, too. If anyone who postulated a theory which was later proven incorrect could be prosecuted for being wrong, science would screech to a halt.

Part of the game is to toss out ideas and eliminate them until you have a solution, or have to hunt new ideas. Lather, rinse, repeat.

Given that, however, the freedom to contend otherwise is essential to the vindication or refutation of an idea. Without the ability to openly challenge and debate those ideas, demagoguery slips in, and science is not science, but takes on a cult religious aspect.

Demanding it be believed (or else) can only destroy innovation and progress, real progress on the frontiers of human knowledge.

Open discourse, and especially reasoned disagreement is vital to scientific inquiry, as is scrupulous honesty in both methodology and the gathering/presentation of data.

After all, whatever it is, it is what it is, and we won't understand it by assuming it is what it isn't, much less demanding that that assumption be accepted without dissent.

16 posted on 03/24/2014 9:34:48 AM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: rktman
Dan Weiss is not a scientist.

According to the Center for American Progress website, he is a "graduate of the University of Michigan with both a Bachelor of Arts and Master of Public Policy degrees."

17 posted on 03/24/2014 9:37:19 AM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: <1/1,000,000th%

LOL! Public Policy major. Guess it’s payin’ him at least. Oh, sorry. “Master” of Pubic policy.


18 posted on 03/24/2014 10:01:24 AM PDT by rktman (Ethnicity: Redneck. Race: Daytona 500)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe

I understand your point. I wouldn’t want to disparage true scientific study and theories. When a citizen applies for a grant , entrance to a college a job or social welfare programs they can be prosecuted for fraud fired or some other remedy for not being truthful. I’d just like the same standard for agenda driven pseudoscience for profit. If data is faked or cherry picked for favorable results and negative data thrown out because it does not support a forgon conclusion or support the theory and it is used to change policy to remove money from us or enrich the believers thru grants, paychecks or business ventures that profit from phony data then prosecute them.


19 posted on 03/24/2014 10:40:41 AM PDT by spudville
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: rktman

With all of their anger, you would think they would love the chance to kick the ass of a denier in a debate.


20 posted on 03/24/2014 10:42:36 AM PDT by listenhillary (Courts, law enforcement, roads and national defense should be the extent of government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spudville
If data is faked or cherry picked for favorable results and negative data thrown out because it does not support a forgon conclusion or support the theory and it is used to change policy to remove money from us or enrich the believers thru grants, paychecks or business ventures that profit from phony data then prosecute them.

Works for me!

21 posted on 03/24/2014 11:56:00 AM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson