“You have signed the death warrant for science,” scientist Peter Webster wrote to a colleague, recently.
The recipient of this charge had signed onto an entreaty to President Barack Obama, U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch, and White House Office of Science and Technology Policy Director John Holdren — along with 19 fellow climate scientists. They asked for an investigation into companies and organizations that publicly express doubt about predictions of impending catastrophic man-made global warming. Specifically, they urge the administration to pursue this line of assault using the oft-abused RICO statute, the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act.
Yes, the scientists are calling for harassment of dissenters and straight-out censorship.
Ronald Bailey, over at Reason, calls this a “new low in politicizing science.” Climatologist Judith Curry, who quoted Webster’s above judgment as an epigraph to her post on the subject, colorfully characterized her reaction: “When I first spotted this, I rolled my eyes — another day, more insane U.S. climate politics.”
The 20 alarmists, for their part, draw a parallel to the tobacco RICO investigations that were so influential a few decades ago. But that original case was badly decided. Moreover, RICO laws are themselves an affront.
The anthropogenic global warming catastrophists have previously undermined their case — lies, conspiracies to hide data, misleading use of computer models, and a relentless campaign to turn scientific inquiry into “settled science” will do that. But now, the grotesque spectacle of scientists demanding that the full weight and force of coercive government come down on their “opponents” completely destroys any remaining shred of credibility.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
5 replies on “Scientists for Censorship”
…best and most succinct post I’ve seen on this atrocious, horrible, anti-science, anti-American proposal. Shame on these morons. Keep up the good fight…
Anyone espousing anything that they are not willing to debate and defend in the most open public forum is immediately suspect, and most probably well aware of their position’s weaknesses. As the Pope is visiting — see history, the Catholic Church and Galileo..
John,
well said.
Funny you should bring up the Pope, as in another thread on this issue I mentioned going back to burning heretics at the stake in terms of those questioning AGW. Unfortunately, as well-intentioned as he might be, Francis is not only pushing the same AGW nonsense, but an equally incorrect view on Socialist vs. Capitalist economics.
Quite a trial balloon, isn’t it? Aside from being an admission of fraud. Will they soon go after the millions who question the validity of the official conspiracy theory of 9/11? Will my book After 9/11 Truth (http://www.amazon.com/After-11-Truth-Death-Humanity/dp/1507662416/?tag=thecofcoa-20) be banned and myself shuffled off to the Gulag?
In the article, the word, “scientist,” should not be left without quote marks around it in reference to the twenty alarmists. The very essence of science is doubt, and a call forcibly to erase doubt from the public dialog is anti-science, and those, who advocate that censorship, have excluded themselves from science. They are not scientists, no matter what they call themselves; they are climate religionists.