Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Mainstream Politics and Economics -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: koan who wrote (22380)	8/6/2012 2:02:36 PM
From: longnshort	3 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 85487

you never responded to my links and quotes about executing and imprisoning global warming deniers, why is that ?

To: koan who wrote (22380)	8/6/2012 2:05:28 PM
From: longnshort	2 Recommendations Respond to of 85487

really ? re education camps Climate change skeptics should be “treated,” says enviro-sociologist This just smacks of the same mentality that inspired climate change activists to say global warming deniers should be purged from meteorology. Kari Mari Norgaard, a professor of sociology and environmental studies at the University of Oregon, suggests that resistance to the threat of climate change at individual and societal levels must be “recognized and treated” before real action can be taken to effectively address the problem global warming poses. From a University of Oregon press release: “Climate change poses a massive threat to our present social, economic and political order. From a sociological perspective, resistance to change is to be expected,” she said. “People are individually and collectively habituated to the ways we act and think. This habituation must be recognized and simultaneously addressed at the individual, cultural and societal level — how we think the world works and how we think it should work.” … At the personal level, climate-change information raises fear about the future, a sense of helplessness and guilt. These emotions clash with individual — and often national — identity, sense of self-efficacy and the need for basic security and survival. In small groups, interactions often subvert political conversations and/or submerge the visibility of climate-change issues. At the macro level, or society at large, the co-authors point to an absence of serious discussion of climate change within U.S. Congressional hearings and in media coverage. In many discussions in the last 30 years, climate change has been seen as either a hoax or fixable with minimal political or economic intervention, said Norgaard, author of the book “Living in Denial: Climate Change, Emotions and Everyday Life” (2011, MIT Press). “This kind of cultural resistance to very significant social threat is something that we would expect in any society facing a massive threat,” she said. The discussion, she said, is comparable to what happened with challenges to racism or slavery in the U.S. South. Norgaard clearly assumes that climate change science is settled — but it still isn’t. Just three days ago, for example, Princeton physics professor William Happer wrote an article for The Wall Street Journal under the headline, “Global warming models are wrong again.” Here’s a bit of what he had to say: It is easy to be confused about climate, because we are constantly being warned about the horrible things that will happen or are already happening as a result of mankind’s use of fossil fuels. But these ominous predictions are based on computer models. It is important to distinguish between what the climate is actually doing and what computer models predict. The observed response of the climate to more CO2 is not in good agreement with model predictions. We need high-quality climate science because of the importance of climate to mankind. But we should also remember the description of how science works by the late, great physicist, Richard Feynman: “In general we look for a new law by the following process. First we guess it. Then we compute the consequences of the guess to see what would be implied if this law that we guessed is right. Then we compare the result of the computation to nature, with experiment or experience; compare it directly with observation, to see if it works. If it disagrees with experiment it is wrong.” The most important component of climate science is careful, long-term observations of climate-related phenomena, from space, from land, and in the oceans. If observations do not support code predictions—like more extreme weather, or rapidly rising global temperatures—Feynman has told us what conclusions to draw about the theory. Norgaard is surely right that there are plenty of unscientific reasons to wish to think climate change does not pose the threat some scientists say it does. An acceptance of that hypothesized threat might impose certain obligations — to, say, purchase a low emissions vehicle — that a person might wish to avoid. Yet, there are surely plenty of unscientific reasons to wish to think climate change does pose the threat some scientists say it does. A desire for the power and latitude to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, for example, might motivate some politicians to accept climate science that they would not otherwise. In charged debates like this one, it’s not helpful to use rhetoric that suggests dissenters are diseased. Far better to patiently engage in respectful discussion.

To: koan who wrote (22380)	8/6/2012 2:06:30 PM
From: longnshort	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 85487

STALINIST OREGON PROFESSOR ADVOCATES RE-EDUCATION CAMPS FOR GLOBAL WARMING SKEPTICS April 7th, 2012 \| 10 Comments Professor Norgaard advocates Re-Education Camps for Global Warming Skeptics Professor Kari Norgaard presented a paper last week, at the PLANET UNDER PRESSURE conference in London, in which she argues that skeptics of anthropogenic climate change must be IDENTIFIED and TREATED for their aberrant sociological behaviour. She also compares skepticism of climate change with racism in the south and support of slavery.

To: koan who wrote (22380)	8/6/2012 2:13:34 PM
From: longnshort	1 Recommendation Respond to of 85487

"This would be a sorry country if they followed your nonsense." and if people like you ran the country. gulag city. Siberia or bust. thought police Professor Kari Norgaard is a winner of the first ever Real Revo Trofim Denisovich Lysenko Award! Congratulations Professor Norgaard! Professor Norgaard’s demand that promoters of scientific theories that are in contradiction with politically approved theories be declared insane is in the highest tradition of Comrade Lysenko’s work in promoting the agenda of the State. Professor Norgaard has beautifully captured the essence of the December 1929 speech of Soviet leader Joseph Stalin in which he praised “practice” above “theory” and the service of science to the state. In his scientific research in service to the state, Comrade Lysenko caused the expulsion, imprisonment, and death of hundreds of scientists and eliminating all study and research involving any theory in contradiction with those he promoted. Professor Norgaard has taken Comrade Lysenko’s dedication in serving the Party and adapted it to American politics and climate science in a way that reflects glory on science in the service of ideology. Congratulations Professor Norgaard. May you receive all of the glory and honor Comrade Lysenko received right up to the end of his career.