Posted on 08/19/2019 7:57:44 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
The Climate Mobilization, a group pushing for a World War II-scale national mobilization to fight global warming, condemned the media for pursuing "objectivity" by giving air time to "climate deniers." Aligned with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), the organization wants the media to silence all voices opposing their climate alarmism.
"Some media outlets are sacrificing the future of our planet for the sake of appearing objective," Margaret Klein Salamon, founder and executive director of The Climate Mobilization, said in a news release Saturday.
"This idea of equating climate deniers with scientific experts is a dangerous practice which frames the threat to our planet, our existence as an ongoing debate," Klein Salamon added. "I don’t think sacrificing the future of our planet in exchange for a look of 'objectivity' is an even exchange. It’s one the coming generation will judge us on, if we don’t move with the urgency necessary to fight back against global warming and win."
In other words, climate alarmists aren't just calling for radical changes to America to stave off some hypothetical climate disaster — they're also calling for opposing voices to be silenced. "Science" can only have one voice, and that voice must be Chicken Little.
The Climate Mobilization seized on a Newsweek article about a study from Nature Communications. The study's authors claimed that the U.S. news media gives "climate change deniers too much prominence by placing people with little understanding of the complexities involved in the same league as top scientists."
"It's time to stop giving these people visibility, which can be easily spun into false authority," University of California Merced Professor Alex Petersen said in a statement. Petersen and his team traced the digital footprints of voices for and against climate alarmism across 100,000 media articles.
(Excerpt) Read more at pjmedia.com ...
against global warming and win.”
I thought it was “global climate CHANGE” now.
To cover all bases.
What about the free and open Debate , Oh wait AOC is scared to death of Debates ,LOL
Oh, antifa climate division?
AOC demands a lot of things. Imagine being the poor schmuck who dates this dingbat.
Some media outlets are sacrificing everything and anything to achieve the New World Order.
Global government is the goal.
The CO2 scare is the method.
Has there ever been a time when science advanced by silencing the opposition, no matter how wrong that opposition might have been?
I’ll get you my pretty, and your little dog too!
The first freedom typically restricted by a socialist state... Freedom of thought and speech.
You must think the way they do, speak the way they do. Deviation and dilution of the politically correct thought process always leads to revolt and the eventual demise of the state.
Out of sight, out of mind, right Margaret?
You people are nuts. What happened to balance in the news?
The policies promoting “ Climate Change” have nothing to do with saving the planet. It’s all about Centralized Command of Everything
If you must silence those who disagree with you, then you certainly have no confidence in your side of the argument.
“I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death my right to silence you, harass you and even prosecute you for saying it.”
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
An Open Invitation to Tyranny
paulcraigroberts.org ^ | 8/7/19 | Paul Craig Roberts
Posted on 8/13/2019, 9:44:04 AM by LibWhacker
The FBI has published a document that concludes that “conspiracy theories” can motivate believers to commit crimes.
https://www.scribd.com/document/420379775/FBI-Conspiracy-Theory-Redacted#download
Considering the growing acceptance of pre-emptive arrest, that is, arresting someone before they can commit a crime that they are suspected of planning to commit, challenging official explanations, such as those offered for the assassinations of John F. Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, and Martin Luther King or the official explanation for 9/11, can now result in monitoring by authorities with a view to finding a reason for pre-emptive arrest.
Presidents George W. Bush and Obama created the police state precedents of suspension of habeas corpus and assassination of citizens on suspicion alone without due process. If Americans can be preemptively detained indefinitely and preemptively assassinated, Americans can expect to be preemptively imprisoned for crimes that they did not commit.
As Lawrence Stratton and I explained in our book, The Tyranny of Good Intentions, the historic achievement of forging law into a shield of the people is being reversed in our time as law is being reforged into a weapon in the hands of the government.
The FBI document says that conspiracy theories “are usually at odds with official or prevailing explanations of events.” Note the use of “official” and “prevailing.” Official explanations are explanations provided by governments. Prevailing explanations are the explanations that the media repeats.
Examples of official and prevailing explanations are: Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction, Assad’s use of chemical weapons, Iranian nukes, Russian invasion of Ukraine, and the official explanation by the US government for the destruction of Libya. If a person doubts official explanations such as these, that person is a “conspiracy theorist.”
Official and prevailing explanations do not have to be consistent with facts. It is enough that they are official and prevailing. Whether or not they are true is irrelevant. Therefore, a person who stands up for the truth can be labeled a conspiracy theorist, monitored, and perhaps pre-emptively arrested.
Consider 9/11. No forensic investigation of 9/11 was ever officially conducted. Instead the destruction of the buildings was blamed on Osama bin Laden, and scenarios and simulations were created to support the allegation, not to find the truth. Architects, engineers, scientists, pilots, and first responders on site cannot reconcile the official prevailing explanation with the facts.
The scientific and testimonial evidence that they have produced is dismissed as “conspiracy theory.” It is those experts who stand on the evidence who are defined as conspiracy theorists, not those who created the story of Osama bin Laden’s 9/11 conspiracy.
Consider Russiagate. Here we have an alleged conspiracy between Trump and Russia that was the official prevailing explanation. Yet, to believe in the Russiagate conspiracy did not make one a conspiracy theorist as this conspiracy was the official prevailing explanation. But to doubt the Russiagate conspiracy did make one a conspiracy theorist.
What the FBI report does, intentionally or unintentionally, is to define a conspiracist as a person who doubts official explanations. In other words, it is a way of preventing any accountability of government. Whatever the government says, no matter how obvious a lie, will have to be accepted as fact or we will be put on a list to be monitored for preemptive arrest.
In effect, the FBI’s document reduces the First Amendment, that is, free speech, to the right to repeat official and prevailing explanations. Any other speech is a conspiratorial belief that can lead to the commission of a crime.
Every American should be greatly concerned that the government in Washington does not see this FBI document as an open invitation to tyranny, repudiate it, and demand its recall.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3771425/pos
Environmentalists Killed More Europeans Than Islamic Terrorists!
Frontpage Mag ^ | 08/19/2019 | Daniel Greenfield
Posted on 8/19/2019, 8:01:19 AM by SeekAndFind
“Do Americans Need Air-Conditioning?” a New York Times piece asked in July. Air conditioning, it argued, is bad for the environment and makes us less human. It ran quotes suggesting that, “first world discomfort is a learned behavior”, and urging “a certain degree of self-imposed suffering”.
If environmentalists ruled the world, air conditioning wouldn’t exist. And there’s a place like that.
90% of American households have air conditioning. As do 86% of South Koreans, 82% of Australians, 60% of Chinese, 16% of Brazilians and Mexicans, 9% of Indonesians and less than 5% of Europeans.
A higher percentage of Indian households have air conditioning than their former British colonial rulers.
Temperatures in Paris hit 108.6 degrees. Desperate Frenchmen dived into the fountains of the City of Lights with their clothes on. Parisian authorities announced that they were deploying heat wave management plan orange, level three, which meant setting up foggers in public parks and distributing heat wave kits. The kits consist of leaflets telling people to go to libraries which have air conditioning.
France24, the country’s state-owned television network, advised people suffering from temperatures rising as high as 110 degrees to take cold showers and stick their feet in saucepans of cold water.
A 2003 heat wave killed 15,000 people in France. And, in response, the authorities have deployed Chalex, a database of vulnerable people who will get a call offering them cooling advice.
The advice consists of taking cold showers and sticking their feet in saucepans of cold water.
Desperate Frenchmen trying to get into any body of water they can have led to a 30% rise in drownings. The dozens of people dead are casualties of the environmentalist hatred of air conditioners.
Only 5% of French households have air conditioning. Even in response to the crisis, the authorities are only deploying temporary air conditioning to kindergartens.
The 2003 heat wave killed 7,000 people in Germany. And, today, only 3% of German households have air conditioning. Germany’s Ministry of the Environment refused to back air conditioning as a response to global warming.
Temperatures in Dusseldorf hit 105 degrees. Officials in Dusseldorf had recently rejected proposals to install air conditioning systems because they’re bad for the environment.
The climate action head at Germany’s Institute for Applied Ecology explained that air conditioning wouldn’t work because there’s not much wind during heat waves, and the country can’t end reliance on coal and run air conditioners at the same time. You can have air conditioners or save the planet.
But not both.
The issue isn’t poverty. in Greece, one of the poorest countries in Europe, 99% of households have air conditioning. What it comes down to is a willingness to choose comfort over environmental dogma.
In Europe, people are dying because they’ve been told that their sacrifices will save the planet.
The 2003 heat wave killed 70,000 people in Europe. That’s more than Islamic terrorists have.
When environmentalists claim that global warming is a greater threat than Islamic terrorism, they’re half-right. Global warming isn’t real, but the measures taken to fight it are killing thousands of people.
And it doesn’t have to be this way.
In 2007, only 2% of Indian households had air conditioning. Those numbers have more than doubled. India is expected to field a billion air conditioning units by 2050.
“I am not rich,” an Indian laundryman earning $225 a month, who had just put in air conditioning, told a disapproving Agence France-Presse, but we all aspire to a comfortable life.”
Some of us do.
The 2003 heat wave killed 2,000 Brits. The current heat wave has led to London being placed on a Level 3 health watch. But air conditioning in the UK still hovers at 3% of households. And every summer, the local media lectures Brits on the evils of air conditioning.
Every heat wave is treated as a compelling argument for reducing power to save the planet. The heat and its accompanying misery are treated as heralds of a global warming apocalypse. Soon, we are told, it’ll be hot all the time, the waters will rise, the icebergs will melt, and life will perish from the earth.
When a heat wave consumed Europe in 1540, leading to the hottest temperatures on record and the deaths of thousands, the people blamed a higher power. In England, where the River Trent dried up, the megadrought was blamed on Henry VIII’s sacrilegious crackdown on monasteries. Modern Europeans have a simple, rational explanation. Mother Earth is angry because we’re using air conditioners.
Or other people are.
China has 569 million installed air conditioners. More than any other country in the world. South Korea has 59 million air conditioners. That’s more than France, Germany and the UK combined.
Europe’s sacrifice is not only senseless, it’s also meaningless.
Vietnam has become a booming market for air conditioners. 17% of Vietnamese households now have one. Indonesia is leading its own boom in air conditioning. As is much of Asia and the Middle East.
Europe can go on letting its people die for the environment, but it won’t make any difference.
Air conditioning isn’t some American fetish, as European elitists sneer. It’s a worldwide movement. Every country that can manage it is getting air conditioners. Meanwhile people are dying in France.
While the rest of the world is cooling off, Europe is in thrall to a pagan pseudoscientific cult.
Its tenets insist that the planet is a living entity, but fail to understand its true implications. The climate is part of a living entity which changes on a timescale that challenges human understanding. For a thousand years of recorded history, Europe has undergone alternate warming and cooling periods. The Medieval Climate Anomaly was an example of how complicated those cyclical changes could be.
A heat wave isn’t proof that we’ve sinned against Mother Earth by heating and cooling our homes. It’s a reminder that the environment operates on an inescapable scale that is vaster than human beings.
We can cut down forests and build dams. But so can beavers. We cannot change the climate.
The bones of hippos have been found under Trafalgar Square. The Chauvet Cave in France includes pictures of rhinos. The Little Ice Age killed off England’s vineyards in the 14th century. The Thames began to freeze over in the 17th century. The Viking colonization of America collapsed under the wave of cold.
Air conditioning and heating are not how we change the climate. They’re how we cope with it.
Environmentalism has so hopelessly tangled human civilization and the environment that we are no longer able to understand the planet on its own terms, instead of as a luddite eschatology in which the climate is a deity punishing us for our civilizational ingenuity with hot weather and natural disasters.
And that makes it extremely difficult to adapt to the changes in a healthy way.
A century ago, Americans beat the heat by wading in fountains, sleeping on roofs and fire escapes, and escaping the city. Air conditioning has made it possible for us to live and work across the entire country.
In 1896, a heat wave killed thousands of Americans. New York City authorities resorted to the same measures as their modern Parisian counterparts, turning on fire hydrants and handing out ice.
Those temperatures amounted to a mere 90 degrees.
In 1902, Willis Carrier invented the air conditioner in Brooklyn. He imagined a world in which, “The average businessman will rise, pleasantly refreshed, having slept in an air-conditioned room. He will travel in an air-conditioned train, and toil in an air-conditioned office.” We live in that world now.
At the New York World’s Fair, while temperatures outside hit 90 degrees, Carrier debuted an Igloo display. Two giant thermometers contrasted “Nature’s temperature” with “air conditioning”.
It sold itself.
Air conditioning allows New Yorkers to shrug off 90-degree weather and go on living and working.
Today, New York is the home of the Green New Deal which believes in following Europe’s trends. If New York adopts Europe’s environmentalism, it will discover what living in 1896 really felt like.
Environmentalists have killed thousands of Europeans. They can kill thousands of Americans too.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3772839/posts
Still pushing the half truth which makes it to be a total misrepresentation. Not a soul on the planet believes the climate does not change. The objection is that anthropogenic climate change is not significant enough to be considered any degree of threat.
p
The true facts concerning “climate Change” drive the left insane. If they come to exact revenge and violence on true science, let them feel the lead of patriots!
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.