UMichigan prof likens fighting skeptics to fighting slave traders; Says skeptics think of enviros as ‘borderline communists’; Borderline?

“Many climate sceptics do not trust environmentalists because they consider them ‘borderline communists’ who want to curtail people’s freedom, a leading US social scientist says.” Borderline?

Read more at The Australian.

9 thoughts on “UMichigan prof likens fighting skeptics to fighting slave traders; Says skeptics think of enviros as ‘borderline communists’; Borderline?”

  1. Well, they want to control our lives, for the betterment of Mother Earth (similar to Mother Russia), sounds like a form of Communism to me. Of course since in this Utopian world, they would be living the fancy life again similar to the Russian leaders under Communism while the rest of the unwashed masses would bow to their dictates. Sounds like Communism to me.

  2. Present amount of co2 in earth’s atmosphere in 2012: 388 ppm (parts per mil.). The limit to plant growth starts at 250ppm and each doubling of co2 in parts per million equals 300 to 400% of increased plant growth. Plants use co2 for growth and produce oxygen as byproduct that in itself is a strong limit to the amount of co2 in the atmosphere, there are many more “buffering” reactions which makes it impossible to have runaway co2 levels. Also, water vapor is 8 times better at absorbing and reflecting IR (infra-red) than co2 so the “real” greenhouse gas is water vapor. It would be very difficult to convince people to “tax” water vapor so co2 got the nod as the taxable entity and the manipulated computer programs followed immediately! As of early 2012 the amount paid to “study” co2 was 102+ billion. That kind of loose change is going to invite a good deal of fraud just to keep the money flowing. NASA studies of the atmosphere of Mars shows that co2 is 98.8% of the gases making up the shallow atmosphere of Mars, approximately 1/10th that of Earth. Those studies show that the atmosphere on Mars reacts to only the position in relation to the Sun, which raises the temperatures on Mars. Human activity contributes 1/12th of 3% of the additional co2 in the atmosphere with by far the greatest amount coming from the Oceans (plankton break down) and the other source is the chemical changes of lime stone as it breaks down to smaller particles. There are many other “buffers” that would make it impossible for Co2 to ever become a large component of Earth’s Atmosphere. I have many other “facts” I can use in any argument but I’m running out of space and time at this point. Needless to say, if the actual “facts” of co2 as part of the Earth’s Atmosphere were allowed to come out by a largely ignorant press there would be no question who were the “deniers” and who were the “liars”.
    Regards, Gene Ray
    Capt. Pan American Airways

  3. Let’s see, fighting deniers is like fighting slave traders.
    Deniers favor people making their own choices; AGW folks favor making choices for everyone.
    Deniers generally favor development of wealth, which has far more benefits for the poor (and therefore for minorities) than for the already-well-off.
    AGW folks are against development of wealth, a policy with far more harm for the poor (and therefore for minorities) than for the already-well-off.
    Deniers would remove barriers to Third World countries, predominantly Southern and with people of color, so they can become wealthy and healthy.
    AGW folks are out to increase barriers to Third World countries, ensuring their continued poverty and poor health.
    Hoookay, which side is the slave traders again?

  4. QUOTE Professor Hoffman said a “social consensus” to fight climate change needed to be built, similar to that created in the past to combat smoking and slavery.

    “One of the most important first steps in engaging the debate is not to blame or mock or ridicule,” he said. END QUOTE

    Comparing skeptics to tobacco advocates or promoters of slavery is NOT “blame or mock or ridicule.”?????

  5. Gene, where did you get the info that H2O was 8x better at absorbing backradiated IR compared to CO2? Thx!

  6. No, professor. I think of you as an all-out fascist. Oh, and speaking as a third worlder, I also think of you as a racist, as well, given that your daft views would impact the developing world in a serious and negative way.

Comments are closed.