Discreet Dolls

16 Democrat AGs Begin Inquisition Against ‘Climate Change Disbelievers’

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
31,937
2,885
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
shutting down "climate deniers" using state violence and coercion is enough evidence showing man madde climate change is a myth



Beginning in 1478, the Spanish Inquisition systematically silenced any citizen who held views that did not align with the king’s. Using the powerful arm of the government, the grand inquisitor, Tomas de Torquemada, and his henchmen sought out all those who held religious, scientific, or moral views that conflicted with the monarch’s, punishing the “heretics” with jail sentences; property confiscation; fines; and in severe cases, torture and execution.

One of the lasting results of the Spanish Inquisition was a stifling of speech, thought, and scientific debate throughout Spain. By treating one set of scientific views as absolute, infallible, and above critique, Spain silenced many brilliant individuals and stopped the development of new ideas and technological innovations. Spain became a scientific backwater.

As an old adage says, those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. So we now have a new inquisition underway in America in the 21st century—something that would have seemed unimaginable not too long ago.

Treating climate change as an absolute, unassailable fact, instead of what it is—an unproven, controversial scientific theory—a group of state attorneys general have announced that they will be targeting any companies that challenge the catastrophic climate change religion.

http://dailysignal.com/2016/04/04/1...uisition-against-climate-change-disbelievers/
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
90,580
21,780
113
Feel free to keep disseminating nonsense from the Heartland Institute and other fossil fuel funded propaganda organizations.
Stand your ground, just be prepared to back up your ignorance of science with your wallet.

Just like the tobacco industry got their asses sued off them, Exxon et al are starting to feel the same worry.
But since you are so certain you are right and have science behind you, like moviefan, feel free to put your wallet behind your words.

Unless of course you're worried that you've been wrong all along.....
 

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
31,937
2,885
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
Feel free to keep disseminating nonsense from the Heartland Institute and other fossil fuel funded propaganda organizations.
Stand your ground, just be prepared to back up your ignorance of science with your wallet.

Just like the tobacco industry got their asses sued off them, Exxon et al are starting to feel the same worry.
But since you are so certain you are right and have science behind you, like moviefan, feel free to put your wallet behind your words.

Unless of course you're worried that you've been wrong all along.....

40 years ago they were whining about global cooling and the coming ice age. this is not the same as big tobbaco


so why aren't you going after anti-vaxxers that are responsible for recent epidemics. anti-vaxxers pose more threats to public health than those who reject climate alarmism.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
90,580
21,780
113
40 years ago they were whining about global cooling and the coming ice age. this is not the same as big tobbaco
Its very, very similar.

Tobacco companies did their own research, found tobacco caused cancer, hid the research, paid for tobacco lobbyists to spread disinformation and then got their pants sued off.
Exxon did their own research on climate change, found CO2 causes climate change, hid their research, paid for the same lobbyists and are now facing lawsuits.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,291
6,661
113
If these guys are really scientists they should be able to defend their views. The whole scientific process is essentially an inquisition.

But of course they aren't and don't have a theory to stand up to scrutiny.
 
S

**Sophie**

"Reasonable minds can disagree about the science behind global warming, and disagree they do. This scientific and political debate is healthy and should be encouraged. It should not be silenced with threats of criminal prosecution by those who believe that their position is the only correct one and that all dissenting voices must therefore be intimidated and coerced into silence. It is inappropriate for State Attorneys General to use the power of their office to attempt to silence core political speech on one of the major policy debates of our time."
 

fuji

Banned
Jan 31, 2005
80,011
7
0
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
is.gd
The story in post 1 is nonsensical. The actual reality is not as described in that hyperventilating blog post, and nobody in their right mind should take a site like that at face value.

Think critically, people.
 

Moviefan-2

Court Jester
Oct 17, 2011
10,489
171
63
"Reasonable minds can disagree about the science behind global warming, and disagree they do. This scientific and political debate is healthy and should be encouraged. It should not be silenced with threats of criminal prosecution by those who believe that their position is the only correct one and that all dissenting voices must therefore be intimidated and coerced into silence. It is inappropriate for State Attorneys General to use the power of their office to attempt to silence core political speech on one of the major policy debates of our time."
Exactly! :thumb:
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
90,580
21,780
113
"Reasonable minds can disagree about the science behind global warming, and disagree they do. This scientific and political debate is healthy and should be encouraged. It should not be silenced with threats of criminal prosecution by those who believe that their position is the only correct one and that all dissenting voices must therefore be intimidated and coerced into silence. It is inappropriate for State Attorneys General to use the power of their office to attempt to silence core political speech on one of the major policy debates of our time."
Do you same the same thing about smoking cigarettes?
That's the point here.

Tobacco companies and Exxon both did their own scientific research which found that what they were doing was harmful. They hid the research and then paid for disinformation, that's what they are being sued for. And think about that for a second, Exxon and other fossil fuel companies did their own research that found that they caused global warming. That means that the privately funded research found exactly the same results as government funded research and in fact all legit research. So where is this science that is disagreeing with the consensus, where is it coming from?

The answer is that its coming from the money invested by Exxon and its ilk in disinformation, just like those psuedo studies saying tobacco smoking was good for you.
Don't be a sucker for that nonsense like moviefan is, do a bit of research on your own.

http://insideclimatenews.org/news/2...Heightened-Climate-Litigation-Its-Critics-Say

 

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,768
3
0
There is a important caveat, the State Attorneys General are not attempting to silence personal political free speech. Rather they are threatening to take legal action against companies for fraud if they are taking an official position against Climate Change.

This may not be good, but it is certainly not as bad (and blatantly unconstitutional) as an Inquisition Against ‘Climate Change Disbelievers.’
 

Moviefan-2

Court Jester
Oct 17, 2011
10,489
171
63
A columnist for Bloomberg -- which is normally pro-warming -- is now denouncing the McCarthy-like witch hunt.

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2016-04-08/subpoenaed-into-silence-on-global-warming

Putting aside the immorality of all of this, I believe it is a huge tactical mistake.

Most people still support the general principle of freedom of speech, even if they don't agree with what others are saying. Prosecuting people for the supposed 'crime' of disagreeing with Barack Obama and Al Gore is almost certain to backfire.
 

fuji

Banned
Jan 31, 2005
80,011
7
0
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
is.gd
Do you think it was wrong to sue tobacco companies for promoting smoking as safe when they had studies they themselves ran that showed it was lethal?

Would it then be wrong to sue oil companies for promoting their greenhouse gas emissions as harmless, if it turns out they themselves have already run studies that prove it is destructive?

If these companies KNOW they are causing environmental harm but intentionally lie and publicly argue they do not, then this definition seems to fit:

fraud: deceit or trickery perpetrated for profit or to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage.
 

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
31,937
2,885
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
liquor companies are doing the same thing. Alcohol is listed as a a class A carcinogen by the U.S EPA. and listed as a group one carcinogen by the international research on cancer of the W.H.O. it is in the same category as asbestos, arsenic and arsenic compunds, etc the liquor companies support and promoting flawed studies claiming benefits.


anti-vaxxer are bringing back diseases that were eradicated by vaccinations. and nobody is thinking of holding them accountable
 

fuji

Banned
Jan 31, 2005
80,011
7
0
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
is.gd
liquor companies are doing the same thing. Alcohol is listed as a a class A carcinogen by the U.S EPA. and listed as a group one carcinogen by the international research on cancer of the W.H.O. it is in the same category as asbestos, arsenic and arsenic compunds, etc the liquor companies support and promoting flawed studies claiming benefits.


anti-vaxxer are bringing back diseases that were eradicated by vaccinations. and nobody is thinking of holding them accountable
Can you point to examples of liquor companies claiming alcohol isn't harmful, the way oil companies are denying that they cause climate change?
 

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
31,937
2,885
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
Can you point to examples of liquor companies claiming alcohol isn't harmful, the way oil companies are denying that they cause climate change?
Alcohol ads are all over the place glorifying alcoholism while hypocritcally saying "drink responsibly". the media always release studies claiming benefits.


alcoholics is what driving the industry 80% of all alcohol is consumed by 20% of consumers

http://gawker.com/who-drives-the-alcohol-industry-alcoholics-1639454291
 

fuji

Banned
Jan 31, 2005
80,011
7
0
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
is.gd
Alcohol ads are all over the place glorifying alcoholism while hypocritcally saying "drink responsibly". the media always release studies claiming benefits.


alcoholics is what driving the industry 80% of all alcohol is consumed by 20% of consumers

http://gawker.com/who-drives-the-alcohol-industry-alcoholics-1639454291
That isn't the same. If the alcohol companies do make statements they KNOW to be false then I agree that should also be sued. But at least in your example they aren't doing that.

In any case this was a thread about climate denying by companies that benefit from emitting pollution.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,291
6,661
113
so when are they going after the liquor companies and the anti-vaccine movement that kill more people that denying climate alarmism?
Alcohol companies do not advertise the health benefits of being an alcoholic. And the government has routinely cracked down on falsely advertised health benefits (eg Nutella).

And good of you to compare the climate deniers to the anti-vaxers. They both have the same amount of science behind them.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,291
6,661
113
... the media always release studies claiming benefits.

...
Fact is there are some established benefits of moderate consumption of some alcohols.

Alcohol companies might fund research. Oil companies can fund research too. The fraud is when they lie about what their results show.
 

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
31,937
2,885
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
Fact is there are some established benefits of moderate consumption of some alcohols.

Alcohol companies might fund research. Oil companies can fund research too. The fraud is when they lie about what their results show.
alcohol benefits studies compared non drinkers who stopped drinking due to health problems with moderate drinkers who already living healthy lifestyles and are richer and have greater access to health care
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts