Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Climate Scientists Face Organized Harassment in U.S.

Page 1 of 5 [ 70 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Tollorin
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Jun 2009
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,178
Location: Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada

18 Sep 2012, 11:01 am

And not so much in other countries.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-10/climate-scientists-face-organized-harassment-in-u-s-.html


_________________
Down with speculators!! !


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

18 Sep 2012, 11:18 am

Tollorin wrote:
And not so much in other countries.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-10/climate-scientists-face-organized-harassment-in-u-s-.html


Harrassment? You mean people actually disagree with some of the more extreme predictions of the anthropogenic global warming alarmists?

How dare they disagree!

ruveyn



marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

18 Sep 2012, 11:47 am

ruveyn wrote:
Tollorin wrote:
And not so much in other countries.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-10/climate-scientists-face-organized-harassment-in-u-s-.html


Harrassment? You mean people actually disagree with some of the more extreme predictions of the anthropogenic global warming alarmists?

How dare they disagree!

ruveyn


The thing is they don't just disagree. There are respectable skeptics and there are political hacks who will do anything to smear scientists and misinform people with blatant propaganda. Also, email spam attacks are a form of harassment. The problem is we have a culture in this country that's so arrogantly "anti-elitist" that lay people think they understand better than people who spent their entire life studying this stuff. "Baaah humbug, I know better than those fancy-panted scientists". It's also pretty insulting to people who are curious about what's really going on to have all these fiercely projecting knuckle-draggers telling everyone you only do anything for grant money and don't care about the truth. Seriously, if you're a disingenuous hack that's only in it for the money you'd be better off working for the conservative think tanks as that's where the big money is at. They will shower you with unlimited black stained money if you put effort into only telling them exactly what they want to hear. Myopic self-serving goons they are.



JNathanK
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Oct 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,177

18 Sep 2012, 12:32 pm

marshall wrote:
The problem is we have a culture in this country that's so arrogantly "anti-elitist" that lay people think they understand better than people who spent their entire life studying this stuff.


I think we just have a skewed view of what elitism is. Most scientists I've met come from working class backgrounds who actually give a s**t and have a social conscience. The true "elitists" are the one's funding anti-global warming propaganda, because they care more about personal advancement than how drought and flooding will affect the majority of everyone else in the world. The aristocracy, super rich, and politically powerful, the world over, will always get their food, shelter, and comforts when everyone else is suffering, It was the case with the House of Bourbon in the late 18th century, with the upper class during the Dust Bowl, and with Communist Party officials during the Holodomor. This is why the true elites don't care about Climate change and do anything they can to infuse doubt into the public about environmental crises, whether it be gw, the collapse of the food supply chain, topsoil depletion, water table depletion or deforestation.



GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,880

18 Sep 2012, 1:33 pm

marshall wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Tollorin wrote:
And not so much in other countries.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-10/climate-scientists-face-organized-harassment-in-u-s-.html


Harrassment? You mean people actually disagree with some of the more extreme predictions of the anthropogenic global warming alarmists?

How dare they disagree!

ruveyn


The thing is they don't just disagree. There are respectable skeptics and there are political hacks who will do anything to smear scientists and misinform people with blatant propaganda. Also, email spam attacks are a form of harassment. The problem is we have a culture in this country that's so arrogantly "anti-elitist" that lay people think they understand better than people who spent their entire life studying this stuff. "Baaah humbug, I know better than those fancy-panted scientists". It's also pretty insulting to people who are curious about what's really going on to have all these fiercely projecting knuckle-draggers telling everyone you only do anything for grant money and don't care about the truth. Seriously, if you're a disingenuous hack that's only in it for the money you'd be better off working for the conservative think tanks as that's where the big money is at. They will shower you with unlimited black stained money if you put effort into only telling them exactly what they want to hear. Myopic self-serving goons they are.


I usually refer to this article when presented with scepticism towards anthropogenic climate change:

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/ ... 7.full.pdf



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

18 Sep 2012, 1:38 pm

GGPViper wrote:

I usually refer to this article when presented with scepticism towards anthropogenic climate change:

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/ ... 7.full.pdf


Now they call it Anthropogenic Climate Change. That way when the next ice age comes along they can blame that too on the capitalists.

ruveyn



GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,880

18 Sep 2012, 1:57 pm

ruveyn wrote:
GGPViper wrote:

I usually refer to this article when presented with scepticism towards anthropogenic climate change:

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/ ... 7.full.pdf


Now they call it Anthropogenic Climate Change. That way when the next ice age comes along they can blame that too on the capitalists.

ruveyn


I apologize for my apparent ignorance, but I have read your response several times, and I fail to see the logic in your comment. The article does not contain any references to Milankovitch cycles/orbital forcing.



Pileo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 523

18 Sep 2012, 2:25 pm

Whether or not you agree there is Global Warming, harassing people is not okay and is never a justifiable response. It's tragic that these adults are acting like their in grade school again.



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

18 Sep 2012, 4:15 pm

One of the most ridiculous articles I've ever read. People disagree with me and let me know it, boo hoo. How do you thinking 'skeptics' feel amongst not only the public but their own peers? Skeptics is what they're called when the other side wants to play victim, they also like deniers as to compare them to Holocaust deniers. Totally not poisoning the well with that term. :roll:

People are skeptical of their government funded findings and file FOI requests? Oh the humanity! They comment on internet articles saying they disagree with them? THEY'RE TRYING TO SILENCE US! So... we... need... to silence them?

People that believe in 'anthropogenic climate change', as Ruveyn phrases it, probably more than 9 times out of 10 don't believe in it because of some greater understanding or knowledge of science but rather because it lends support and moral justification of their ideological beliefs. Socialists believe studies that support socialism? Government funded scientists find findings require more government funding to study? You don't say?



GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,880

18 Sep 2012, 4:29 pm

Jacoby wrote:
One of the most ridiculous articles I've ever read. People disagree with me and let me know it, boo hoo. How do you thinking 'skeptics' feel amongst not only the public but their own peers? Skeptics is what they're called when the other side wants to play victim, they also like deniers as to compare them to Holocaust deniers. Totally not poisoning the well with that term. :roll:

People are skeptical of their government funded findings and file FOI requests? Oh the humanity! They comment on internet articles saying they disagree with them? THEY'RE TRYING TO SILENCE US! So... we... need... to silence them?

People that believe in 'anthropogenic climate change', as Ruveyn phrases it, probably more than 9 times out of 10 don't believe in it because of some greater understanding or knowledge of science but rather because it lends support and moral justification of their ideological beliefs. Socialists believe studies that support socialism? Government funded scientists find findings require more government funding to study? You don't say?


Am I to understand, then, that you do not agree with the conclusions in this previously mentioned PNAS article?
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/ ... 7.full.pdf



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

18 Sep 2012, 4:54 pm

GGPViper wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
One of the most ridiculous articles I've ever read. People disagree with me and let me know it, boo hoo. How do you thinking 'skeptics' feel amongst not only the public but their own peers? Skeptics is what they're called when the other side wants to play victim, they also like deniers as to compare them to Holocaust deniers. Totally not poisoning the well with that term. :roll:

People are skeptical of their government funded findings and file FOI requests? Oh the humanity! They comment on internet articles saying they disagree with them? THEY'RE TRYING TO SILENCE US! So... we... need... to silence them?

People that believe in 'anthropogenic climate change', as Ruveyn phrases it, probably more than 9 times out of 10 don't believe in it because of some greater understanding or knowledge of science but rather because it lends support and moral justification of their ideological beliefs. Socialists believe studies that support socialism? Government funded scientists find findings require more government funding to study? You don't say?


Am I to understand, then, that you do not agree with the conclusions in this previously mentioned PNAS article?
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/ ... 7.full.pdf

I'm not sure the relevance to my post. What understanding of these sciences does you average politician or voter have?



Tollorin
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Jun 2009
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,178
Location: Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada

18 Sep 2012, 5:01 pm

Jacoby wrote:
One of the most ridiculous articles I've ever read. People disagree with me and let me know it, boo hoo. How do you thinking 'skeptics' feel amongst not only the public but their own peers? Skeptics is what they're called when the other side wants to play victim, they also like deniers as to compare them to Holocaust deniers. Totally not poisoning the well with that term. :roll:

People are skeptical of their government funded findings and file FOI requests? Oh the humanity! They comment on internet articles saying they disagree with them? THEY'RE TRYING TO SILENCE US! So... we... need... to silence them?

People that believe in 'anthropogenic climate change', as Ruveyn phrases it, probably more than 9 times out of 10 don't believe in it because of some greater understanding or knowledge of science but rather because it lends support and moral justification of their ideological beliefs. Socialists believe studies that support socialism? Government funded scientists find findings require more government funding to study? You don't say?

This is more that simple disagrement, this is death treat! And I could throw back at you that certainly 9 of 10 peoples who don't believe in climate change don't know the science either, not with over-simplistic statement like "CO2 is plant food". :roll:

Those who know the science the most, agree that there is anthropogenic global warming.


_________________
Down with speculators!! !


GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,880

18 Sep 2012, 5:14 pm

Jacoby wrote:
GGPViper wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
One of the most ridiculous articles I've ever read. People disagree with me and let me know it, boo hoo. How do you thinking 'skeptics' feel amongst not only the public but their own peers? Skeptics is what they're called when the other side wants to play victim, they also like deniers as to compare them to Holocaust deniers. Totally not poisoning the well with that term. :roll:

People are skeptical of their government funded findings and file FOI requests? Oh the humanity! They comment on internet articles saying they disagree with them? THEY'RE TRYING TO SILENCE US! So... we... need... to silence them?

People that believe in 'anthropogenic climate change', as Ruveyn phrases it, probably more than 9 times out of 10 don't believe in it because of some greater understanding or knowledge of science but rather because it lends support and moral justification of their ideological beliefs. Socialists believe studies that support socialism? Government funded scientists find findings require more government funding to study? You don't say?


Am I to understand, then, that you do not agree with the conclusions in this previously mentioned PNAS article?
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/ ... 7.full.pdf

I'm not sure the relevance to my post. What understanding of these sciences does you average politician or voter have?


I was simply pointing out that science seems to confirm the beliefs held by those who believe in anthropogenic climate change...



Pileo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 523

18 Sep 2012, 5:15 pm

Jacoby wrote:
One of the most ridiculous articles I've ever read. People disagree with me and let me know it, boo hoo.


Whoa...?

Have you been on the internet!? When people are anonymous they do the craziest sh**, especially young people (who have been getting obnoxiously political lately, now the elections are coming up. Look at Reddit). I believe them when they say they're getting death threats and other hate mail. I'd be surprised if they didn't! For that matter, I'm sure anti-Global Warming leaders also get death threats too. It doesn't make it more right. Harassing people who you disagree with is never acceptable, no matter what side you're on.

Instead of getting defensive, how about we turn to them and tell them to stop it. They're ruining it for the rest of the anti-Global Warmers, who have the maturity to not act like a child.



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

18 Sep 2012, 5:27 pm

Tollorin wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
One of the most ridiculous articles I've ever read. People disagree with me and let me know it, boo hoo. How do you thinking 'skeptics' feel amongst not only the public but their own peers? Skeptics is what they're called when the other side wants to play victim, they also like deniers as to compare them to Holocaust deniers. Totally not poisoning the well with that term. :roll:

People are skeptical of their government funded findings and file FOI requests? Oh the humanity! They comment on internet articles saying they disagree with them? THEY'RE TRYING TO SILENCE US! So... we... need... to silence them?

People that believe in 'anthropogenic climate change', as Ruveyn phrases it, probably more than 9 times out of 10 don't believe in it because of some greater understanding or knowledge of science but rather because it lends support and moral justification of their ideological beliefs. Socialists believe studies that support socialism? Government funded scientists find findings require more government funding to study? You don't say?

This is more that simple disagrement, this is death treat! And I could throw back at you that certainly 9 of 10 peoples who don't believe in climate change don't know the science either, not with over-simplistic statement like "CO2 is plant food". :roll:


Absolutely and if 9 out of 10 people on either side of the issue have no idea what they're talking about then maybe they shouldn't be advocating policy on it. Agreeing with the science of climate change is completely different from agreeing about the politics of climate change. I don't think anybody cares what scientists find in their research, they care about how it will be applied to them by politicians.



nominalist
Supporting Member
Supporting Member

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jun 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,740
Location: Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas (born in NYC)

18 Sep 2012, 5:39 pm

That is because junk science is not sufficiently addressed in the American educational structure. Many Americans also believe in creationism or accept the Internet hoax that the whole solar system is heating up.


_________________
Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. (retired tenured sociology professor)
36 domains/24 books: http://www.markfoster.net
Emancipated Autism: http://www.neurelitism.com
Institute for Dialectical metaRealism: http://dmr.institute