Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Heating up: Climate change advocates try to silence Krauthammer
Fox News ^ | February 24, 2014 | Howard Kurtz

Posted on 02/24/2014 8:02:21 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife

Charles Krauthammer says it right up front in his Washington Post column: “I’m not a global warming believer. I’m not a global warming denier.”

He does, however, challenge the notion that the science on climate change is settled and says those who insist otherwise are engaged in “a crude attempt to silence critics and delegitimize debate.”

How ironic, then, that some environmental activists launched a petition urging the Post not to publish Krauthammer’s column on Friday.

Their response to opinions they disagree with is to suppress the speech.

Brad Johnson (@ClimateBrad), the editor of HillHeat.com and a former Think Progress staffer, boasted on Twitter that 110,000 people had urged the newspaper “to stop publishing climate lies” like the Krauthammer piece.

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


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: climatechange; climatechangefraud; envirowhackos; freespeech; globalwarming; globalwarminghoax; krauthammer; kurtz; liberalfascism; lysenkoism; msm; science
...."Lysenkoism is used metaphorically to describe the manipulation or distortion of the scientific process as a way to reach a predetermined conclusion as dictated by an ideological bias, often related to social or political objectives."...
1 posted on 02/24/2014 8:02:21 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3126318/posts#8

....Somewhere along the line it came to be believed by many of the public, and indeed by many of the scientists themselves, that climate researchers were the equivalent of knights on white steeds fighting a great battle against the forces of evil—evil, that is, in the shape of “big oil” and its supposedly unlimited money. The delusion was more than a little attractive.....”

______________________________________________

Their MSM army of disinformation:

The Society of Environmental Journalism SEJ

About SEJ “The Society of Environmental Journalists is the only North-American membership association of professional journalists dedicated to more and better coverage of environment-related issues. SEJ’s mission is to strengthen the quality, reach and viability of journalism across all media to advance public understanding of environmental issues.

SEJ is an independent, nonpartisan educational association dedicated to the highest standards of public service journalism. SEJ’s 2012 operating budget of $864,369 (audited figure) was underwritten by foundation grants, dues, fees, university and media company sponsorship and unrestricted gifts up to $15,000 from any source.

The organization was founded in 1990 by award-winning print and broadcast journalists on staff with The Philadelphia Inquirer, USA Today, National Geographic, Turner Broadcasting/CNN, Scripps Howard News Service, Minnesota Public Radio and others. SEJ’s membership now includes more than 1,500 highly qualified journalists, editors, educators and students working in print, broadcast and online news media throughout the U.S., Canada, Mexico and 27 other countries. Members and others who use SEJ services report environmental news and information to millions of readers, listeners and viewers worldwide, on a daily basis.

Spotlight on SEJ Members
SEJ Member Affiliations
Download the SEJ brochure (PDF / 6.48 MB).

In 2010, SEJ was co-winner of the Gulbenkian International Prize, which distinguishes an individual or institution “whose thoughts or actions make a decisive contribution to and have significant impact on understanding, defending or fostering the universal values of the human condition.”

SEJ established a Diversity Task Force in 2010 to foster and promote greater coverage and understanding of environmental issues that affect minority and other marginalized communities. “SEJers, UNITY Coalition J-group partner members (i.e., NABJ, NAHJ, AAJA, NAJA) and other SEJ membership-eligible journalists are encouraged to join the DTF’s SEJ-DIVERSITY email discussion listserv. The open listserv forum is intended to support the goals of the DTF and promote collaboration, such as connecting SEJ panel submissions with other sister journalism groups. To join the listserv or to find out more about volunteer opportunities for SEJ members and UNITY J-group partner members, contact DTF co-chair Ayana Meade.”


2 posted on 02/24/2014 8:04:42 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
How ironic, then, that some environmental activists launched a petition urging the Post not to publish Krauthammer’s column on Friday.

Ironic? How about predictable?

3 posted on 02/24/2014 8:05:30 AM PST by Texas Eagle (If it wasn't for double-standards, Liberals would have no standards at all -- Texas Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Texas Eagle

Careful Charles. They may be carrying an icicle as “suggested” by the nyslimes.


4 posted on 02/24/2014 8:06:33 AM PST by rktman (Under my plan(scheme),unemployment will necessarily skyrocket! Despite the % dropping. Period.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
"...Of course, most climate-change proponents are perfectly willing to argue their case on the merits. Unfortunately, that doesn’t apply to everyone.

Dr. K is too gracious. From my experiences only a small fraction of the members of the Church of the Global Warming have such inclinations.

5 posted on 02/24/2014 8:07:06 AM PST by corkoman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

When you google Brad Johnson, you sure see he has been busy.


6 posted on 02/24/2014 8:07:23 AM PST by Zathras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
Of course, most climate-change proponents are perfectly willing to argue their case on the merits.

Actually, it's the exact reverse of this. Most skeptics are eager to engage in discussion of the facts -- it's the "proponents" who screech to shut down the "debate" ("It's over!!")

7 posted on 02/24/2014 8:07:56 AM PST by Cincinatus (Omnia relinquit servare Rempublicam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Krauthammer to get the same treatment as Mark Steyn, eh?


8 posted on 02/24/2014 8:09:25 AM PST by Army Air Corps (Four Fried Chickens and a Coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
The globull warming nazis are hard at work on their Endlösung for any skeptics.
9 posted on 02/24/2014 8:09:35 AM PST by Carl Vehse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
He does, however, challenge the notion that the science on climate change is settled...

With liberals, all progressive ideas are viewed as "settled". You simply can't have a meaningful discussion with them or disagree with their dogma. Skeptics are quickly dismissed as ignorant neanderthals.

Liberals are the keepers of the truth and enlightenment and serve as the great protectors of mother earth and all its inhabitants. /sarc

10 posted on 02/24/2014 8:10:13 AM PST by Starboard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
HEAVY DUTY IRONY ALERT!

*110,000 people had urged the newspaper “to stop publishing climate lies” *

WOW! 100K people begging to have free speech stamped out. People used to wonder how Germany allowed the Socialists to take power in the 1930’s. Here's your answer. The public is easily brainwashed into worshiping the opinion of the government above Science or common sense.

If the government says it, it must be true. No questions asked. No questions ALLOWED to be asked. So when the government gets frustrated with people like Krauthammer telling the truth, the government may soon take the next step and use the final solution like the Socialists in China, the Soviet Union and other leftist totalitarian states.

11 posted on 02/24/2014 8:11:22 AM PST by PATRIOT1876
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Ping.


12 posted on 02/24/2014 8:12:43 AM PST by Army Air Corps (Four Fried Chickens and a Coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman

Good advice. An icicle launched from a drone.


13 posted on 02/24/2014 8:13:30 AM PST by Texas Eagle (If it wasn't for double-standards, Liberals would have no standards at all -- Texas Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus

“Most skeptics are eager to engage in discussion of the facts — it’s the “proponents” who screech to shut down the “debate” (”It’s over!!”)”

___________________________________________________________

The loser in the Whitehouse being among them.


14 posted on 02/24/2014 8:16:33 AM PST by AlphaOneAlpha
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: FReepers
The Climate Hoax


Click The Pic To Donate

Support FR, Donate Monthly If You Can

Less Than 10.5K To Go And The Freepathon Is Over!


15 posted on 02/24/2014 8:16:45 AM PST by DJ MacWoW (The Fed Gov is not one ring to rule them all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus
As Mark Steyn well knows.
16 posted on 02/24/2014 8:16:54 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Carl Vehse; All
Oct 10, 2013 - L.A. Times cuts off climate-change deniers Last month, a panel of the world's top scientists presented its latest review of the data on climate change. The analysis concluded with 95 percent certainty -- the gold standard in science -- that climate change is manmade.

And with that, as far as "The Los Angeles Times" is concerned, the debate is over. The Times is among mainstream media sources that quietly stopped giving a voice to climate-change deniers. There was no initial policy statement or announcement -- the letters editor simply stopped choosing to print letters from climate change deniers. This weekend, he mentioned the decision as an aside in an editor's note."...

17 posted on 02/24/2014 8:20:54 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Starboard; All
Reddit has banned climate change deniers, and ripped its own reputation to shreds
18 posted on 02/24/2014 8:23:26 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3126397/posts?page=39#39

My # 39

Great minds…………………...


19 posted on 02/24/2014 8:23:50 AM PST by morphing libertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Global warming is a great scam for money see AlGore&Co.


20 posted on 02/24/2014 8:28:24 AM PST by Vaduz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: morphing libertarian
4 News Outlets Ban Climate Change Deniers

Reddit

Los Angeles Times

The Sydney Morning Herald

Popular Science

21 posted on 02/24/2014 8:29:03 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Attacking anyone who won’t bow down and declare allegience to the god of liberalism.


22 posted on 02/24/2014 8:40:22 AM PST by I want the USA back (Media: completely irresponsible traitors. Complicit in the destruction of our country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Carl Vehse

Funny it seems when the common man flourishes as in America this last century or so… the (misnamed)”Progressives” are first to condemn it and demand a rationed society (such as socialism)!?! I spose only our “owners” should be able to drive SUVs and fly jets? CO2 is NOT for us? Liberty and prosperity for the masses has been proclaimed “dangerous” to Earth, thus must be controlled. Any who question, much less oppose this tyranny... must be silenced! Stalin lives in the cold hearts and closed minds of (misnamed)”progressives”.


23 posted on 02/24/2014 8:43:02 AM PST by FiddlePig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

What’s the differenc between flat earthers and climate realists? Everyone would love to debate a flat earther. When have the Warmongers ever wanted to have a public debate? Never. They fear being torn apart by facts in an environment where their fake concensus can’t protect them.

Oh yea, the climate is changing. But its the climate of blindly accepting the bogus pseudo-science of grant whores.


24 posted on 02/24/2014 8:53:13 AM PST by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Try and ask questions respectfully and you will get knocked down and ridiculed. Any appeal to authority is anti science at its highest. Climate change science is a set of shaky hypothesis and far short of a theory. No one has a track record of making accurate predictions based on a model.

That is certainly not to say that climate change should not be studied, quite the opposite, it hasn’t been changed enough. We are putting out a lot of CO2 and we have degraded some carbon sinks. However, we are not at the point of blaming every small variation in weather to those two items.

Over the last 800,000 years for which we have ice core data, the current level of CO2 is very slightly higher than average. During these years, there have been very drastic climate changes — desertification of the Sahara, dramatic ice ages, etc. all with very low CO2 concentrations. Over the last 65 million years, the CO2 levels have been much higher than they are now. Our current .03 - .04 levels are very low in comparison with .27 + levels which we have had without it triggering a mass extinction event.

On the other hand, politically authoritarian and monetary gain for the progressives seems the main motives behind the climate change hysteria now being pushed. Less freedom and more equality for the masses is the goal. You’ve got to scare people in order to control them.


25 posted on 02/24/2014 8:53:42 AM PST by JimSEA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Starboard
Liberals are the keepers of the truth and enlightenment and serve as the great protectors of mother earth and all its inhabitants.

And history has shown they're more than ready to eliminate anyone who disagrees with them. As for protecting all earth's inhabitants, they only care about the non-human ones. They see human beings other than themselves as a problem to be "solved."

26 posted on 02/24/2014 8:55:24 AM PST by Bernard Marx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: JimSEA

“Virtually all scientists directly involved in climate prediction are aware of the enormous uncertainties associated with their product. How is it that they can place hands over hearts and swear that human emissions of carbon dioxide are wrecking the planet?”

http://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2014/01-02/fundamental-uncertainties-climate-change/

“...In the light of all this, we have at least to consider the possibility that the scientific establishment behind the global warming issue has been drawn into the trap of seriously overstating the climate problem—or, what is much the same thing, of seriously understating the uncertainties associated with the climate problem—in its effort to promote the cause. It is a particularly nasty trap in the context of science, because it risks destroying, perhaps for centuries to come, the unique and hard-won reputation for honesty which is the basis of society’s respect for scientific endeavour. Trading reputational capital for short-term political gain isn’t the most sensible way of going about things.

The trap was set in the late 1970s or thereabouts when the environmental movement first realised that doing something about global warming would play to quite a number of its social agendas. At much the same time, it became accepted wisdom around the corridors of power that government-funded scientists (that is, most scientists) should be required to obtain a goodly fraction of their funds and salaries from external sources—external anyway to their own particular organisation.

The scientists in environmental research laboratories, since they are not normally linked to any particular private industry, were forced to seek funds from other government departments. In turn this forced them to accept the need for advocacy and for the manipulation of public opinion. For that sort of activity, an arm’s-length association with the environmental movement would be a union made in heaven. Among other things it would provide a means by which scientists could distance themselves from responsibility for any public overstatement of the significance of their particular research problem.

The trap was partially sprung in climate research when a number of the relevant scientists began to enjoy the advocacy business. The enjoyment was based on a considerable increase in funding and employment opportunity. The increase was not so much on the hard-science side of things but rather in the emerging fringe institutes and organisations devoted, at least in part, to selling the message of climatic doom. A new and rewarding research lifestyle emerged which involved the giving of advice to all types and levels of government, the broadcasting of unchallengeable opinion to the general public, and easy justification for attendance at international conferences—this last in some luxury by normal scientific experience, and at a frequency previously unheard of.

Somewhere along the line it came to be believed by many of the public, and indeed by many of the scientists themselves, that climate researchers were the equivalent of knights on white steeds fighting a great battle against the forces of evil—evil, that is, in the shape of “big oil” and its supposedly unlimited money. The delusion was more than a little attractive.

The trap was fully sprung when many of the world’s major national academies of science (such as the Royal Society in the UK, the National Academy of Sciences in the USA and the Australian Academy of Science) persuaded themselves to issue reports giving support to the conclusions of the IPCC. The reports were touted as national assessments that were supposedly independent of the IPCC and of each other, but of necessity were compiled with the assistance of, and in some cases at the behest of, many of the scientists involved in the IPCC international machinations. In effect, the academies, which are the most prestigious of the institutions of science, formally nailed their colours to the mast of the politically correct........”


27 posted on 02/24/2014 8:58:42 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Journalism majors are ideologically pure, they accept Liberal dogma without question and are willing to do their part to advance their environmental progressive beliefs. They are ideally suited to comment on climate science and to help silence dissenters as none of this has the slightest thing to do with actual science, it’s all a big scam to advance political agendas.


28 posted on 02/24/2014 9:00:30 AM PST by centurion316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
"I am always troubled by a theory that fits every perfect situation. You know, back in the '70s - I remember the '70s, we were told there was global cooling. And everyone was told global cooling was a really big problem. And then that faded. And then we were told by Al Gore and others there was global warming and that was going to be a big problem. And then it morphed. It wasn't global warming anymore, it became climate change. And the problem with climate change is there's never been a day in the history of the world in which the climate is not changing," said Cruz.

Ted Cruz, CNN February 20th, 2014

29 posted on 02/24/2014 9:02:58 AM PST by TexasCajun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bernard Marx

And history has shown they’re more than ready to eliminate anyone who disagrees with them. They would put us on the rack if they could.

*********
True that. Liberals are engaging in a modern day Inquisition of their own to rid the country of “heretics”.


30 posted on 02/24/2014 9:07:58 AM PST by Starboard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Consensus is now science and dissent is no longer patriotic.


31 posted on 02/24/2014 9:10:37 AM PST by TurboZamboni (Marx smelled bad and lived with his parents .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Thank you. I hadn’t read that before and it says it much better than I can.


32 posted on 02/24/2014 9:14:19 AM PST by JimSEA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: JimSEA
Over the last 800,000 years for which we have ice core data, the current level of CO2 is very slightly higher than average. During these years, there have been very drastic climate changes — desertification of the Sahara, dramatic ice ages, etc. all with very low CO2 concentrations. Over the last 65 million years, the CO2 levels have been much higher than they are now. Our current .03 - .04 levels are very low in comparison with .27 + levels which we have had without it triggering a mass extinction event.

The biggest FACT that is a lie by intentional omission is that increases in global temperature precede increases in CO2. Not that CO2 increases, then temps increase, implying CO2 is causing temperature change. CO2 levels are an indicator that the temps have already been higher.

33 posted on 02/24/2014 9:15:07 AM PST by USCG SimTech (Honored to serve since '71)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

I wonder what ended the previous ice ages


34 posted on 02/24/2014 9:18:52 AM PST by muir_redwoods (When I first read it, " Atlas Shrugged" was fiction)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: corkoman
The fact is that warming alarmists cannot argue the issue on the merits without rapidly reaching a loss for words.
35 posted on 02/24/2014 9:23:20 AM PST by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: FReepers; Patriots; FRiends






Free Republic is Your Voice and Your Forum!
We Really Need and Appreciate Your Loyal Support!
PLEASE Make Your Donation Today, Monthly, if You POSSIBLY & RELIABLY can!

36 posted on 02/24/2014 9:43:25 AM PST by onyx (Please Support Free Republic - Donate Monthly! If you want on Sarah Palin's Ping List, Let Me know!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hinckley buzzard

They are Clima-Phobic


37 posted on 02/24/2014 9:54:15 AM PST by um1990
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

more science open to review LOL


38 posted on 02/24/2014 10:08:26 AM PST by morphing libertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

The thing that is somewhat discouraging is that when global warming is finally broken and is seen for the turd it is, the same folks who pushed it will be pushing the next lefty thing with full media credentials.


39 posted on 02/24/2014 10:10:40 AM PST by BRL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BRL

No matter what the liberal left’s do, including the global warming zealots, if you speak against them in any way, shape of fashion, they will do what they can to destroy you. Krauthammer is no exception. They don’t like the fact that ol’ Charles has people who actually listen to what he says and believe it, unlike the liberals. The libs are afraid of Charles, he gets his message UNDERSTOOD.


40 posted on 02/24/2014 11:26:18 AM PST by DaveA37
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: BRL

No matter what the liberal left’s do, including the global warming zealots, if you speak against them in any way, shape of fashion, they will do what they can to destroy you. Krauthammer is no exception. They don’t like the fact that ol’ Charles has people who actually listen to what he says and believe it, unlike the liberals. The libs are afraid of Charles, he gets his message UNDERSTOOD.


41 posted on 02/24/2014 11:26:24 AM PST by DaveA37
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Starboard
With liberals, all progressive ideas are viewed as "settled". You simply can't have a meaningful discussion with them or disagree with their dogma. Skeptics are quickly dismissed as ignorant neanderthals.
Liberals are the keepers of the truth and enlightenment and serve as the great protectors of mother earth and all its inhabitants. /sarc

Perhaps it's worth noting where this technique was legitimized (if not 'invented' :)
The smartest woman in the world from Arkansas.

Reminds me of a fascinating quote from a Chinese Com government during the "International Woman's Conference" held in China during the Clinton administration.
The government official said that they studied Hillary's speechmaking method to understand her power and success. They concluded: her trick was never actually to make any arguments -- just state conclusions that were all already accepted as self-evident by her audience. (They found that interesting and perhaps admirable, and to be emulated).

Un fortunately, all the demagoguic candidates seem to have picked up on the theme; the manipulators, the “politicians,” the frauds, who don’t deserve to be in any elected office or position of authority.

And then there's this :
In one of his lecture series gems, Richard Feynman, scientist, philosopher and Nobel Prize Winner, touches upon this low level of scientific mentality and historical perspective.
"Looking back at the worst times [in history] it always seems that they were times in which there were some people who believed with absolute faith and absolute dogmatism in something. And they were so serious in this matter that they insisted that the world agree with them. And then they would do things that were directly inconsistent with their own beliefs in order to maintain what they said was true.

42 posted on 02/24/2014 1:06:57 PM PST by publius911 ( At least Nixon had the good g race to resign!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: publius911

And then they would do things that were directly inconsistent with their own beliefs in order to maintain what they said was true.

***********
Liberals are nothing if not hypocites. World class hypocrites. And they are particularly skilled in the use of broad sweeping generalizations and convenient vagueness. In their deceitful world, dogma triumps over facts.


43 posted on 02/24/2014 2:26:34 PM PST by Starboard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; Bockscar; cardinal4; ColdOne; ...

Thanks Cincinatus’ Wife.


44 posted on 02/25/2014 3:30:16 PM PST by SunkenCiv (http://www.freerepublic.com/~mestamachine/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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