Author

Topic: Reddit’s science forum banned climate deniers. - page 183. (Read 636458 times)

sr. member
Activity: 405
Merit: 250
I'm all for it. They're not stifling free speech, they're stifling ignorance and stupidity, one of the greatest threats to the survival and well-being of the human race.

So you are all for silencing speech that you consider ignorant and stupid? Not only are you ignorant and stupid, but you are also a fascist and that has nothing to do with climate science.

It is just as facist of you to think you should be able to say what you want in private forums and everyone should be forced to read it even though that is not what they went there for.

You might not like it, but you're no less of a fascist yourself.

I think you need to look up the definition of fascism and then apply it to the context of the discussion. 

Fascism really has nothing to do with it at all.  It is a privately held message board.  I understand you don't like that those people choose not to read you people anymore.  I've given the skeptics plenty of time here to try and convince me.  Blech.  You feel entitled to make people listen to you in a privately owned forum meant for one purpose.  People have this right to remove you all the time and should continue.  Nothing to do with fascism. They're no more fascists than you are for insisting on some sort of entitlement of venue.
sr. member
Activity: 406
Merit: 250
I'm all for it. They're not stifling free speech, they're stifling ignorance and stupidity, one of the greatest threats to the survival and well-being of the human race.

So you are all for silencing speech that you consider ignorant and stupid? Not only are you ignorant and stupid, but you are also a fascist and that has nothing to do with climate science.

It is just as facist of you to think you should be able to say what you want in private forums and everyone should be forced to read it even though that is not what they went there for.

You might not like it, but you're no less of a fascist yourself.

I think you need to look up the definition of fascism and then apply it to the context of the discussion. 
sr. member
Activity: 405
Merit: 250
I'm all for it. They're not stifling free speech, they're stifling ignorance and stupidity, one of the greatest threats to the survival and well-being of the human race.

So you are all for silencing speech that you consider ignorant and stupid? Not only are you ignorant and stupid, but you are also a fascist and that has nothing to do with climate science.

It is just as facist of you to think you should be able to say what you want in private forums and everyone should be forced to read it even though that is not what they went there for.

You might not like it, but you're no less of a fascist yourself.
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
I'm all for it. They're not stifling free speech, they're stifling ignorance and stupidity, one of the greatest threats to the survival and well-being of the human race.

So you are all for silencing speech that you consider ignorant and stupid? Not only are you ignorant and stupid, but you are also a fascist and that has nothing to do with climate science.
But we feast on nothing less than the opinions of the many.

Well, unless it be the consensus of the few.
sr. member
Activity: 406
Merit: 250
I'm all for it. They're not stifling free speech, they're stifling ignorance and stupidity, one of the greatest threats to the survival and well-being of the human race.

So you are all for silencing speech that you consider ignorant and stupid? Not only are you ignorant and stupid, but you are also a fascist and that has nothing to do with climate science.
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
I'm all for it. They're not stifling free speech, they're stifling ignorance and stupidity, one of the greatest threats to the survival and well-being of the human race.
That's certainly an interesting point of view.

Who gets to decide what constitutes free speech, ignorance and stupidity, and the nuanced variations and differences between them?

I'm pretty sure I know what the answer should be.  It would of course, be that people who think like me get to decide these things.  That would make the world more to my liking....
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
I'm all for it. They're not stifling free speech, they're stifling ignorance and stupidity, one of the greatest threats to the survival and well-being of the human race.

So the warmists are the torchbearer of the TRUTH.

sr. member
Activity: 280
Merit: 250
Knowledge is Power
I'm all for it. They're not stifling free speech, they're stifling ignorance and stupidity, one of the greatest threats to the survival and well-being of the human race.
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
Global warming deniers are antisemitics.. Thats all. We dont agree with this system, hence we are hateful people. Been there done that. F*** em all.
Okay, yeah.  I'm watching Silicon Valley and really, like this thread isn't weird enough.  It needs to at least match up and rate.

Can we start famous quotes of wisdom from Paul Erlich or something?

"Giving society cheap, abundant energy would be the equivalent of giving an idiot child a machine gun."
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon


Hmmm... Now I understand why this thread is so "popular". Who knew!  Grin  Cheesy  Grin
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------






http://ecowatch.com/2014/05/23/survey-climate-change-abortion-gun-control-death-penalty/

legendary
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1002
Global warming deniers are antisemitics.. Thats all. We dont agree with this system, hence we are hateful people. Been there done that. F*** em all.
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
Obviously banning is not the right to do and it hinders the freedom of speech, but you have to consider that most of the climate deniers are way too vocal (as most of them are politically or money driven) and it makes it hard to have a civil conversation with them, heck some did and were found guilty to provide fake and trafficed data as fact for the sake of winning an argument. So really I understand why banning is a bad thing, but at the same time I can understand that it might have been the only solutions for mods to keep some sections clean, only that, but it's not that bad either because climate deniers could make their own reddit and no one will stop them to say whatever they want there so it's not as bad as it seems

"Most climate deniers are way too vocal"
"Most of them are politically or money driven
"

Are we supposed to believe the warmists are not too vocal, not politically or money driven?


I'm still trying to figgur out what a Climate Denier is.

I know a couple years ago warmies were saying it was someone who said "It's not warming!".

Are they still saying that?
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
Obviously banning is not the right to do and it hinders the freedom of speech, but you have to consider that most of the climate deniers are way too vocal (as most of them are politically or money driven) and it makes it hard to have a civil conversation with them, heck some did and were found guilty to provide fake and trafficed data as fact for the sake of winning an argument. So really I understand why banning is a bad thing, but at the same time I can understand that it might have been the only solutions for mods to keep some sections clean, only that, but it's not that bad either because climate deniers could make their own reddit and no one will stop them to say whatever they want there so it's not as bad as it seems

"Most climate deniers are way too vocal"
"Most of them are politically or money driven
"

Are we supposed to believe the warmists are not too vocal, not politically or money driven?

hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 501
Obviously banning is not the right to do and it hinders the freedom of speech, but you have to consider that most of the climate deniers are way too vocal (as most of them are politically or money driven) and it makes it hard to have a civil conversation with them, heck some did and were found guilty to provide fake and trafficed data as fact for the sake of winning an argument. So really I understand why banning is a bad thing, but at the same time I can understand that it might have been the only solutions for mods to keep some sections clean, only that, but it's not that bad either because climate deniers could make their own reddit and no one will stop them to say whatever they want there so it's not as bad as it seems
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
18 years of no warming and he decides it's not cooling but warming?

This guy must not have seen last winter.

Last winter was the eight warmest winter in modern times.  Yes, the USA was in a deep chill but not the rest of the planet. 
SO ... >  that proves BOTH GLOBAL WARMING AND CLIMATE CHANGE at once!

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/378653/hard-sell-climate-change-john-fund

More and more people in the middle of America — both geographically and culturally — have come to believe either that global warming is manageable or that extraordinary efforts to slow the economy to combat it aren’t worth the cost. But that “doesn’t faze the bicoastal urban media elite,” says Myron Ebell of the Competitive Enterprise Institute. These elites, he adds, “have become more hysterical in their treatment of the issue, blaming everything from drought to wildfires to hurricanes on climate change.” It doesn’t matter that there is clear evidence such phenomena are cyclical, and that — for instance — while California is experiencing a severe drought, Florida residents have recently experienced some of the quietest hurricane seasons in decades.
legendary
Activity: 1386
Merit: 1004
18 years of no warming and he decides it's not cooling but warming?

This guy must not have seen last winter.

Last winter was the eight warmest winter in modern times.  Yes, the USA was in a deep chill but not the rest of the planet. 
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
18 years of no warming and he decides it's not cooling but warming?

This guy must not have seen last winter.
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon


Top Climate Alarmist Paul Ehrlich Predicts People Will Be Forced To “Eat The Bodies of Your Dead” Because of Global Warming Apocalypse…



Ehrlich, a Stanford University biologist famous for his widely debunked book “The Population Bomb,” doubled down on his climate change and overpopulation fear-mongering with HuffPost Live on May 21. Ehrlich warned host Josh Zepps that the dangers of overpopulation are growing, blaming Republicans and the media for failing to take action. While hawking a new book called “Hope On Earth,” Ehrlich’s co-author Michael Tobias praised Ehrlich’s older, outrageously wrong predictions and said they underestimated the problem.

Ehrlich, after falsely predicting  human “oblivion” 46 years ago, told Zepps humans must soon begin contemplating “eat[ing] the bodies of your dead” after resources are depleted.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/sean-long/2014/05/22/alarmist-paul-ehrlich-predicts-need-eat-bodies-your-dead



Wasn't Ehrlich a big Global Cooling guy back in the 1970s and 1980s? 

The Direct Beer Injection method looks promising.

As promising as a zombie needing glasses to read.

Jump to: