Author

Topic: Reddit’s science forum banned climate deniers. - page 199. (Read 636458 times)

legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon




Saving the planet from climate change is ‘beyond our ability’ and we should stop wasting time trying to tackle global warming, a leading scientist has claimed

James Lovelock, who first detected CFCs in the atmosphere and proposed the Gaia hypotheses, claims society should retreat to ‘climate-controlled cities’ and give up on large expanses of land which will become inhabitable.

Lovelock, who has just published his latest book A Rough Ride To The Future, claims we should be ‘strengthening our defences and making a sustainable retreat.’

“We’re reaching an age in history where you can no longer predict the future with any hope of success.

“We should give up vainglorious attempts to save the world.

“Britain is no longer a world power and we need to leave such schemes to the USA, Japan or China. We should spend out efforts adapting Britain to fight climate change.”

The latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is expected to say the world will need a ‘Plan B’ because it is unlikely countries will reduce carbon emissions in time.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/10752606/We-should-give-up-trying-to-save-the-world-from-climate-change-says-James-Lovelock.html

legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
hmm...yeah, that does not really do it for me, in terms of racketing up the guilt...

here...try this one...I'ts got a mean guy, a big train and a little innocent girl..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOi5FclEh_Q

If that's not good enough, let me know.  There are some that have teddy bears and puppies and babies.  Real tear jerkers.



Well Sir, I shall see your teddy bears and raise you a suicidal pack of monkey, polar bear and locomotive loving kangaroo....

http://youtu.be/8PMtD9z4Eoo
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
hmm...yeah, that does not really do it for me, in terms of racketing up the guilt...

here...try this one...I'ts got a mean guy, a big train and a little innocent girl..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOi5FclEh_Q

If that's not good enough, let me know.  There are some that have teddy bears and puppies and babies.  Real tear jerkers.

legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon


The game is up for climate change believers
Charles Moore reviews The Age of Global Warming by Rupert Darwall (Quartet)






[...]
The origins of warmism lie in a cocktail of ideas which includes anti-industrial nature worship, post-colonial guilt, a post-Enlightenment belief in scientists as a new priesthood of the truth, a hatred of population growth, a revulsion against the widespread increase in wealth and a belief in world government. It involves a fondness for predicting that energy supplies won’t last much longer (as early as 1909, the US National Conservation Commission reported to Congress that America’s natural gas would be gone in 25 years and its oil by the middle of the century), protest movements which involve dressing up and disappearing into woods (the Kindred of the Kibbo Kift, the Mosleyite Blackshirts who believed in reafforestation) and a dislike of the human race (The Club of Rome’s work Mankind at the Turning-Point said: “The world has cancer and the cancer is man.”).

These beliefs began to take organised, international, political form in the 1970s. One of the greatest problems, however, was that the ecologists’ attacks on economic growth were unwelcome to the nations they most idolised – the poor ones. The eternal Green paradox is that the concept of the simple, natural life appeals only to countries with tons of money. By a brilliant stroke, the founding fathers developed the concept of “sustainable development”. This meant that poor countries would not have to restrain their own growth, but could force restraint upon the rich ones. This formula was propagated at the first global environmental conference in Stockholm in 1972.

[...]
The G7 Summit in Toronto in 1988 endorsed the theory of global warming. In the same year, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was set up. The capture of the world’s elites was under way. Its high point was the Kyoto Summit in 1998, which enabled the entire world to yell at the United States for not signing up, while also exempting developing nations, such as China and India, from its rigours.

The final push, brilliantly described here by Darwall, was the Copenhagen Summit of 2009. Before it, a desperate Gordon Brown warned of “50 days to avoid catastrophe”, but the “catastrophe” came all the same. The warmists’ idea was that the global fight against carbon emissions would work only if the whole world signed up to it. Despite being ordered to by President Obama, who had just collected his Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo, the developing countries refused. The Left-wing dream that what used to be called the Third World would finally be emancipated from Western power had come true. The developing countries were perfectly happy for the West to have “the green crap”, but not to have it themselves. The Western goody-goodies were hoist by their own petard.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/non_fictionreviews/10748667/The-game-is-up-for-climate-change-believers.html


legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon


NYT’s Friedman Compares Global Warming Deniers to Trotsky Marxists – Blames Global Warming for Syrian Revolution (Video)

New York Times columnist and author Thomas Friedman sited a debunked study to compare global warming deniers to Trotsky Marxists – then blames the Syrian revolution on global warming, not on Bashir Assad’s brutality.

Let me put this in personal terms. Your son or daughter has a disease. And you go to 100 doctors. 97 out of a hundred say, “This is a cause and this is a cure,” and three percent say, “This is a cause and this is a cure.” It’s like 97% of experts say this. 3% say that. And, conservatives say, “I’m going to go with the 3%.” That’s not conservative. That’s Trotskyite-radical… That’s what we saw in Syria. We saw a four-year drought in Syria’s mondern history that proceeded the revolution there. That produced a million refugees that basically led a predicate for that revolution.

http://youtu.be/ew4GR066GHE

I'm having trouble making any sense of that.

Everything he says makes perfect sense according to his Pulitzer Prize....
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386


NYT’s Friedman Compares Global Warming Deniers to Trotsky Marxists – Blames Global Warming for Syrian Revolution (Video)

New York Times columnist and author Thomas Friedman sited a debunked study to compare global warming deniers to Trotsky Marxists – then blames the Syrian revolution on global warming, not on Bashir Assad’s brutality.

Let me put this in personal terms. Your son or daughter has a disease. And you go to 100 doctors. 97 out of a hundred say, “This is a cause and this is a cure,” and three percent say, “This is a cause and this is a cure.” It’s like 97% of experts say this. 3% say that. And, conservatives say, “I’m going to go with the 3%.” That’s not conservative. That’s Trotskyite-radical… That’s what we saw in Syria. We saw a four-year drought in Syria’s mondern history that proceeded the revolution there. That produced a million refugees that basically led a predicate for that revolution.

http://youtu.be/ew4GR066GHE

I'm having trouble making any sense of that.
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon


NYT’s Friedman Compares Global Warming Deniers to Trotsky Marxists – Blames Global Warming for Syrian Revolution (Video)

New York Times columnist and author Thomas Friedman sited a debunked study to compare global warming deniers to Trotsky Marxists – then blames the Syrian revolution on global warming, not on Bashir Assad’s brutality.

Let me put this in personal terms. Your son or daughter has a disease. And you go to 100 doctors. 97 out of a hundred say, “This is a cause and this is a cure,” and three percent say, “This is a cause and this is a cure.” It’s like 97% of experts say this. 3% say that. And, conservatives say, “I’m going to go with the 3%.” That’s not conservative. That’s Trotskyite-radical… That’s what we saw in Syria. We saw a four-year drought in Syria’s mondern history that proceeded the revolution there. That produced a million refugees that basically led a predicate for that revolution.

http://youtu.be/ew4GR066GHE
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
There is no such thing as climate.  It's all just a bunch of air and sunshine.

I must have reddit wrong.
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
There is no such thing as climate.  It's all just a bunch of air and sunshine.


A bunch of hot air coming from where the sun never shines...
sr. member
Activity: 451
Merit: 250
There is no such thing as climate.  It's all just a bunch of air and sunshine.
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
Climate deniers are annoying to listen (or read) basically because the stream is moving the other way, but it's surprisingly dictator'ing to censor people based on their opinion if they haven't broken the rules of civilized conversation.

At least climate deniers like myself will not ban you from expressing your speech on my little thread. How refreshing it is to drink from that stream isn't it?  Wink
However mired in drudgery and small thinking minds the "Famous Reddit Ban" may be, I for one would not be opposed to the occasional, Thor-like "lightning bolt from the blue" smashing to little bits a Warmie, after which we could all go back to welcoming an open intellectual discussion.

I mean, banning COULD be fun.  It could be a game.  There could be Bitcoin betting on who might get banned.  There could be a reward paid to the unfortunate Warmie who, upon vomiting the most objectionable combination of polar bears and Katrina and SUV, simply WON THE PRIZE.



That sounds like a full time job haha. I have to say banning people would be fun. But the best way, for me anyway, to make fun of a banner is to let him taste the full freedom of speech he steals from the people he crushed and let the world see it.

Also, if you want to know the heart of your nemesis, pour some honey on his tongue (don't google it. I just came up with this)

OKAY, so I went to reddit.com/r/climate.

SUMMARY:  threads are reposted excerpts from mostly far left environmental groups - media matters, grist, think progress, and so forth, the most rational being from the huffington post.  About 25-30% of posts are actual scientific articles or subject matter, rest are environmental - political - propaganda.  The two moderators are yep, of course, propagandists and make no apologies about it.  

9 users browsing, dropped to 2 while I was there, 1-13 comments on the posts.

Now let me compare that with reddit.com/r/bitcoin.  Comments on posts:

229, 107, 96, 38, 58, 74, 126...no need to continue.  Wait...how many people were browsing the bitcoin threads? 1062!

So, reddit.com/r/climate is a complete objective FAIL.  This thread itself although wide ranging is far more downright interesting that their threads (and this one thread has more comments than all of theirs combined, going way back).  The WHY is interesting.

Because, well....their threads read like propaganda....DULL!!!

http://www.reddit.com/r/climate/





Fascinating to know all those facts about reddit versus my little lonely thread. Thanks.

I would bet that, before the banning, they would have scored much much higher. But who want to see a boxing match with only one dude in a ring?
Your thread is more popular than ALL the reddit climate threads combined.

That is what happens when free speech is stifled in one place and encouraged in another.

Oh, and by the way, that dude in the boxing ring?  He ain't much of a boxer or much to look at...

http://tinyurl.com/l8bdcgb

I really had no idea. Not really into reddit.



That dude in the boxing ring. I think  he is more useful outside as a


I'm actually curious now.  Given the seeming ability of pro and con GW people to get along here in this thread, where was the giant problem that Reddit moderators claim existed? 

The climate threads on Reddit now are cross posted from aggregation from other websites.  So the truth is not that there is minimal user inputs, but basically, nana.  They post to a ghost choir. 

Now by contrast, there has been some rather imaginative and creative contributions to this thread.

The difference on examination is frankly astonishing and a subject in it's own right.
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
Climate deniers are annoying to listen (or read) basically because the stream is moving the other way, but it's surprisingly dictator'ing to censor people based on their opinion if they haven't broken the rules of civilized conversation.

At least climate deniers like myself will not ban you from expressing your speech on my little thread. How refreshing it is to drink from that stream isn't it?  Wink
However mired in drudgery and small thinking minds the "Famous Reddit Ban" may be, I for one would not be opposed to the occasional, Thor-like "lightning bolt from the blue" smashing to little bits a Warmie, after which we could all go back to welcoming an open intellectual discussion.

I mean, banning COULD be fun.  It could be a game.  There could be Bitcoin betting on who might get banned.  There could be a reward paid to the unfortunate Warmie who, upon vomiting the most objectionable combination of polar bears and Katrina and SUV, simply WON THE PRIZE.



That sounds like a full time job haha. I have to say banning people would be fun. But the best way, for me anyway, to make fun of a banner is to let him taste the full freedom of speech he steals from the people he crushed and let the world see it.

Also, if you want to know the heart of your nemesis, pour some honey on his tongue (don't google it. I just came up with this)

OKAY, so I went to reddit.com/r/climate.

SUMMARY:  threads are reposted excerpts from mostly far left environmental groups - media matters, grist, think progress, and so forth, the most rational being from the huffington post.  About 25-30% of posts are actual scientific articles or subject matter, rest are environmental - political - propaganda.  The two moderators are yep, of course, propagandists and make no apologies about it.  

9 users browsing, dropped to 2 while I was there, 1-13 comments on the posts.

Now let me compare that with reddit.com/r/bitcoin.  Comments on posts:

229, 107, 96, 38, 58, 74, 126...no need to continue.  Wait...how many people were browsing the bitcoin threads? 1062!

So, reddit.com/r/climate is a complete objective FAIL.  This thread itself although wide ranging is far more downright interesting that their threads (and this one thread has more comments than all of theirs combined, going way back).  The WHY is interesting.

Because, well....their threads read like propaganda....DULL!!!

http://www.reddit.com/r/climate/





Fascinating to know all those facts about reddit versus my little lonely thread. Thanks.

I would bet that, before the banning, they would have scored much much higher. But who want to see a boxing match with only one dude in a ring?
Your thread is more popular than ALL the reddit climate threads combined.

That is what happens when free speech is stifled in one place and encouraged in another.

Oh, and by the way, that dude in the boxing ring?  He ain't much of a boxer or much to look at...

http://tinyurl.com/l8bdcgb

I really had no idea. Not really into reddit.



That dude in the boxing ring. I think  he is more useful outside as a

legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
Climate deniers are annoying to listen (or read) basically because the stream is moving the other way, but it's surprisingly dictator'ing to censor people based on their opinion if they haven't broken the rules of civilized conversation.

At least climate deniers like myself will not ban you from expressing your speech on my little thread. How refreshing it is to drink from that stream isn't it?  Wink
However mired in drudgery and small thinking minds the "Famous Reddit Ban" may be, I for one would not be opposed to the occasional, Thor-like "lightning bolt from the blue" smashing to little bits a Warmie, after which we could all go back to welcoming an open intellectual discussion.

I mean, banning COULD be fun.  It could be a game.  There could be Bitcoin betting on who might get banned.  There could be a reward paid to the unfortunate Warmie who, upon vomiting the most objectionable combination of polar bears and Katrina and SUV, simply WON THE PRIZE.



That sounds like a full time job haha. I have to say banning people would be fun. But the best way, for me anyway, to make fun of a banner is to let him taste the full freedom of speech he steals from the people he crushed and let the world see it.

Also, if you want to know the heart of your nemesis, pour some honey on his tongue (don't google it. I just came up with this)

OKAY, so I went to reddit.com/r/climate.

SUMMARY:  threads are reposted excerpts from mostly far left environmental groups - media matters, grist, think progress, and so forth, the most rational being from the huffington post.  About 25-30% of posts are actual scientific articles or subject matter, rest are environmental - political - propaganda.  The two moderators are yep, of course, propagandists and make no apologies about it.  

9 users browsing, dropped to 2 while I was there, 1-13 comments on the posts.

Now let me compare that with reddit.com/r/bitcoin.  Comments on posts:

229, 107, 96, 38, 58, 74, 126...no need to continue.  Wait...how many people were browsing the bitcoin threads? 1062!

So, reddit.com/r/climate is a complete objective FAIL.  This thread itself although wide ranging is far more downright interesting that their threads (and this one thread has more comments than all of theirs combined, going way back).  The WHY is interesting.

Because, well....their threads read like propaganda....DULL!!!

http://www.reddit.com/r/climate/





Fascinating to know all those facts about reddit versus my little lonely thread. Thanks.

I would bet that, before the banning, they would have scored much much higher. But who want to see a boxing match with only one dude in a ring?
Your thread is more popular than ALL the reddit climate threads combined.

That is what happens when free speech is stifled in one place and encouraged in another.

Oh, and by the way, that dude in the boxing ring?  He ain't much of a boxer or much to look at...

http://tinyurl.com/l8bdcgb
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
Climate deniers are annoying to listen (or read) basically because the stream is moving the other way, but it's surprisingly dictator'ing to censor people based on their opinion if they haven't broken the rules of civilized conversation.

At least climate deniers like myself will not ban you from expressing your speech on my little thread. How refreshing it is to drink from that stream isn't it?  Wink
However mired in drudgery and small thinking minds the "Famous Reddit Ban" may be, I for one would not be opposed to the occasional, Thor-like "lightning bolt from the blue" smashing to little bits a Warmie, after which we could all go back to welcoming an open intellectual discussion.

I mean, banning COULD be fun.  It could be a game.  There could be Bitcoin betting on who might get banned.  There could be a reward paid to the unfortunate Warmie who, upon vomiting the most objectionable combination of polar bears and Katrina and SUV, simply WON THE PRIZE.



That sounds like a full time job haha. I have to say banning people would be fun. But the best way, for me anyway, to make fun of a banner is to let him taste the full freedom of speech he steals from the people he crushed and let the world see it.

Also, if you want to know the heart of your nemesis, pour some honey on his tongue (don't google it. I just came up with this)

OKAY, so I went to reddit.com/r/climate.

SUMMARY:  threads are reposted excerpts from mostly far left environmental groups - media matters, grist, think progress, and so forth, the most rational being from the huffington post.  About 25-30% of posts are actual scientific articles or subject matter, rest are environmental - political - propaganda.  The two moderators are yep, of course, propagandists and make no apologies about it.  

9 users browsing, dropped to 2 while I was there, 1-13 comments on the posts.

Now let me compare that with reddit.com/r/bitcoin.  Comments on posts:

229, 107, 96, 38, 58, 74, 126...no need to continue.  Wait...how many people were browsing the bitcoin threads? 1062!

So, reddit.com/r/climate is a complete objective FAIL.  This thread itself although wide ranging is far more downright interesting that their threads (and this one thread has more comments than all of theirs combined, going way back).  The WHY is interesting.

Because, well....their threads read like propaganda....DULL!!!

http://www.reddit.com/r/climate/





Fascinating to know all those facts about reddit versus my little lonely thread. Thanks.

I would bet that, before the banning, they would have scored much much higher. But who want to see a boxing match with only one dude in a ring?
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
Interesting article for you all to read, ignore all scientific facts in, and then bash cause it was not on ancient aliens or some other conspiracy documentary on the history channel  Grin : http://news.sciencemag.org/biology/2014/03/warming-world-shrinks-salamanders

Looks like Green Guru James Lovelock is an ancient alien based on your facts.
I have studied Lovelock's ideas and concluded that he was a very sincere man, and very serious.  There are numerous others that appear to be this way.  (Bill Nye would be one, clearly....)

I do not have that impression about James Hansen or Michael Mann, or Suzuki.... 

There, there is that distinctive definite Krugman-like smell.
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
Interesting article for you all to read, ignore all scientific facts in, and then bash cause it was not on ancient aliens or some other conspiracy documentary on the history channel  Grin : http://news.sciencemag.org/biology/2014/03/warming-world-shrinks-salamanders

Looks like Green Guru James Lovelock is an ancient alien based on your facts.
The layering of controversy about "global warming" over and around the salamander study has obfuscated and prevented popular and scientific understanding of the phenomena and results studied.

The shrill calling out of "It's caused by global warming" when mudslides and torrential rains and droughts occur in the Western US Coast prevents understanding or discussion of basic regional weather, climate and meteorology, specifically the Pacific Decadal Oscillation.

The hinting, alluding of AGW as causative with the Katrina hurricane covered up bribes and corruption in the construction of the dikes.

Any time you put one thing in the news or in the scientific literature it pushes something else out of those media.  Nearly complete disinformation is the normal condition.
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
Interesting article for you all to read, ignore all scientific facts in, and then bash cause it was not on ancient aliens or some other conspiracy documentary on the history channel  Grin : http://news.sciencemag.org/biology/2014/03/warming-world-shrinks-salamanders

Looks like Green Guru James Lovelock is an ancient alien based on your facts.
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
Interesting article for you all to read, ignore all scientific facts in, and then bash cause it was not on ancient aliens or some other conspiracy documentary on the history channel  Grin : http://news.sciencemag.org/biology/2014/03/warming-world-shrinks-salamanders
I've seen that study, and thought it was interesting.  It's not a matter of bashing the scientific facts in the study, but ridiculing the alarmist hysteria unscientifically spread over and around the study.  EG, the groundless speculation and the innuendo that hints of an ecosystem out of whack, going wild as a result of man's CO2.

Here's one for you, rather unbelievable.  The High Priest of Warmies has became an Denier.

http://www.climatedepot.com/2014/04/03/green-guru-james-lovelock-on-climate-change-i-dont-think-anybody-really-knows-whats-happening-they-just-guess-lovelock-reverses-himself-on-global-warming/

Jump to: