Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Jackpine Radical

(45,274 posts)
Fri Apr 20, 2012, 10:36 PM Apr 2012

Well, I did it again. Got provoked into responding to a wingnut.

Wingnut sends me this link:

http://www.infowars.com/climate-alarmist-calls-for-burning-down-skeptics-homes/

from which I excerpt this for your edification:

Climate Alarmist Calls For Burning Down Skeptics’ Homes

“Let’s start keeping track of them…let’s make them pay”
Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Thursday, April 19, 2012
Writing for Forbes Magazine, climate change alarmist Steve Zwick calls for skeptics of man-made global warming to be tracked, hunted down and have their homes burned to the ground, yet another shocking illustration of how eco-fascism is rife within the environmentalist lobby.

Comparing climate change skeptics to residents in Tennessee who refused to pay a $75 fee, resulting in firemen sitting back and watching their houses burn down, Zwick rants that anyone who actively questions global warming propaganda should face the same treatment.
“We know who the active denialists are – not the people who buy the lies, mind you, but the people who create the lies. Let’s start keeping track of them now, and when the famines come, let’s make them pay. Let’s let their houses burn. Let’s swap their safe land for submerged islands. Let’s force them to bear the cost of rising food prices,” writes Zwick, adding, “They broke the climate. Why should the rest of us have to pay for it?”
As we have profusely documented, as polls show that fewer and fewer Americans are convinced by the pseudo-science behind man-made global warming, promulgated as it is by control freaks like Zwick who care more about money and power than they do the environment, AGW adherents are becoming increasingly authoritarian in their pronouncements.
Even as the science itself disproves their theories – Arctic ice is thickening, polar bears and penguins are thriving, Himalayan glaciers are growing – climate change alarmists are only becoming more aggressive in their attacks against anyone who dares question the global warming mantra.
Earlier month we highlighted Professor Kari Norgaard’s call for climate skeptics to be likened to racists and ‘treated’ for having a mental disorder. In a letter to Barack Obama, Norgaard also called on the President to ignore the will of the people and suspend democracy in order to enforce draconian ecological mandates.


My response:

NONE OF THAT SHIT HAPPENED. Find the original sources. Find the Lovelock quote. Find any direct quotes anywhere other than on psychotic or psychopathic RW hate sites. Post them. Cite them. They don't exist. Hell, I've read most of those people in their original words. This stuff ain't there, and a guy who reads 0.1 book per year isn't likely to be aware of that. Which, of course, is what they count on. The greatest ally of the great RW Disinformation Machine is the abysmal ignorance of their readership, most of whom are limited in the amount of reading they do by the fact that their lips get tired after about 300 words.
14 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

freshwest

(53,661 posts)
1. Is it any wonder they figure they need guns and ammo? The treehuggers are coming for ya!
Fri Apr 20, 2012, 10:41 PM
Apr 2012

Good job rebutting the domestic terrorists...

MADem

(135,425 posts)
2. George Bernard Shaw has some advice for you--you can take it or not, but it's good advice.
Fri Apr 20, 2012, 10:47 PM
Apr 2012

It's about wrestling with pigs--you get all dirty and the pig likes it.

Don't wrestle with pigs!

PoliticAverse

(26,366 posts)
3. Here's the original interview with Lovelock (from The Guardian)
Fri Apr 20, 2012, 11:01 PM
Apr 2012
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/mar/29/james-lovelock

An excerpt:

"We need a more authoritative world," he says resolutely. "We've become a sort of cheeky, egalitarian world where everyone can have their say. It's all very well, but there are certain circumstances – a war is a typical example – where you can't do that. You've got to have a few people with authority who you trust who are running it. They should be very accountable too, of course – but it can't happen in a modern democracy. This is one of the problems.

"What's the alternative to democracy? There isn't one. But even the best democracies agree that when a major war approaches, democracy must be put on hold for the time being. I have a feeling that climate change may be an issue as severe as a war. It may be necessary to put democracy on hold for a while."

PoliticAverse

(26,366 posts)
4. Here's the Zwick article from Forbes:
Fri Apr 20, 2012, 11:04 PM
Apr 2012
http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevezwick/2012/04/19/a-tennessee-firemans-solution-to-climate-change/

An excerpt:

Let’s take a page from those Tennessee firemen we heard about a few times last year – the ones who stood idly by as houses burned to the ground because their owners had refused to pay a measly $75 fee.

We can apply this same logic to climate change.

We know who the active denialists are – not the people who buy the lies, mind you, but the people who create the lies. Let’s start keeping track of them now, and when the famines come, let’s make them pay. Let’s let their houses burn. Let’s swap their safe land for submerged islands. Let’s force them to bear the cost of rising food prices.


Bolo Boffin

(23,796 posts)
7. It took a bit to get back to some of the data PJW was quoting
Sat Apr 21, 2012, 05:10 AM
Apr 2012

Following the links took me to another PJW article where he quotes an April 11, 2012 Register article about how the hippies are getting it wrong again. It quoted a recent NSIDC report on arctic ice, saying that there's more ice in the Arctic than ever before!

Well, they didn't actually link to the report, which is always a tell for denialists. So I went and found it:

http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2012/04/arctic-sea-ice-enters-the-spring-melt-season/

Needless to say, the Register and PJW is getting the report backwards. Yes, there is a high level of ice extent, highest in the past decade, but that ice is new ice. And it's thin. Once the summer melt gets started, that extent will vanish again.

Ice age data this year show that the ice cover remains much thinner than it was in the past, with a high proportion of first-year ice, which is thin and vulnerable to summer melt. After the record low minimum of 2007 the Arctic lost a significant amount of older, thicker ice, both from melting and from movement of ice out of the Arctic the following winter. In the last few years, the melt and export of old ice was less extreme than in 2007 and 2008, and multiyear ice started to regrow, with second and third-year ice increasing over the last three years.

After the near-record melt last summer, second-year ice declined again, but some of the ice that had survived the previous few summers made it through another year, increasing the proportion of third- and fourth-year ice. However the oldest, thickest ice, more than four years old, continued to decline. Ice older than four years used to make up about a quarter of the winter sea ice cover, but now constitutes only 2%. First-year ice (0 to 1 years old) this year makes up 75% of the total ice cover, the third highest at this time of year in the satellite record. In 2008 the proportion of first-year ice was 79%, and in 2009 it was 76%.


Once again PJW shows his charlatan colors.
 

DCKit

(18,541 posts)
11. Got one from my younger sister last week about "illegals".
Sat Apr 21, 2012, 11:51 AM
Apr 2012

I responded with "You know my S.O. came here illegally, right?" and went on from there. Ronald Reagan's meddling in Latin America played a starring role in my response.

The backpedaling was amazing, and totally lame.

Paladin

(28,262 posts)
13. The Radical Right Depends On Liberal Passivity For Its Power.
Sat Apr 21, 2012, 01:55 PM
Apr 2012

Don't apologize for your forceful response---do it over and over again. And those of you who advocate ignoring the hyper-conservatives and their dangerous lies: shame on you.
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Well, I did it again. Got...