Climate Moonbat Calls For Convicting Oil CEOs

June 24th, 2008 | by Sqotty |

How does one become one of the world’s leading climate scientists? Easy. Scream and yell Chicken Little fashion about how the Man-caused carbon emissions are forcing global warming, then as science begins to prove you wrong, call for bringing those who dissent from your viewpoint to be put on trial and treated as criminals. such are the tactics of the hard-left, most notably one James Hansen (no relation).

From The Guardian:

James Hansen, one of the world’s leading climate scientists, will today call for the chief executives of large fossil fuel companies to be put on trial for high crimes against humanity and nature, accusing them of actively spreading doubt about global warming in the same way that tobacco companies blurred the links between smoking and cancer.

and

In an interview with the Guardian he said: “When you are in that kind of position, as the CEO of one the primary players who have been putting out misinformation even via organisations that affect what gets into school textbooks, then I think that’s a crime.”

James Hansen (no relation, thank God) has taken the position that the Constitution does not apply to those scientists, politicians, CEOs, and others who have come to conclusions on global warming that are diametrically opposed to his view that the recent warming trends of the Earth are due to Man’s use of carbon based fuels (oil).

Hansen (seriously, no bloody relation), by calling for the criminal prosecution of those who support a view-point that the Earth’s climate is dynamic and not heavily influenced by the 0.0383% (yes, that would be less than 4/100ths of 1%) of carbon in our atmosphere as being the major cause of global warming. Not simple scientific facts like the warming trend began when the Little Ice Age ended; ignoring the cooling trend of the ’50s through the ’70s when the world scientific consensus was that we were heading for another ice age; ignoring the continued lack of sunspot activity which is resulting in a slight cooling trend that may go on for years; ignoring the fact that not one single extinction can be directly linked to global warming. I could go on.

Perhaps James Hansen (did I mention he is no relation) can explain to me, if we are going through such a horrendous climate change, how the Greenland ice sheet grew nearly 300 feet thicker between 1943 and 1993? Where did all of that ice come from, and isn’t global cooling more dangerous to the world than warming? Can he explain why this is such a serious problem when even at the warmest point since the end of the Little Ice Age, the Earth was still several degrees COOLER than during the Medieval Warming Period? You know, that period of history when oranges could grow in Mongolia and the Vikings were farming in Greenland?

It is clear to me that the Moonbat left, including James Hansen (no relation, not even by marriage), are not interested in open debate of the facts, only ramming their worldview down our throats, and denying First Amendment Rights to those who have legitimate counter-arguments to their claims. They push the hard-left agenda and damn those with opposing views because they know, deep down, that those opposing views are gaining ground as they are proven to be correct, and the Global Warming hysteria is fueled by those with a political axe to grind, and a hatred for free-markets and oil. People who speak with forked-tongue are always the ones to deny the rights of Free Speech to those with opposing views, and to cry out “Off with their heads!”

Anybody know what kind of car this clown drives?

Tags:

  • Share/Bookmark

Tags: , ,

  1. One Response to “Climate Moonbat Calls For Convicting Oil CEOs”

  2. By Rabo on Jul 7, 2008 | Reply

    “ignoring the cooling trend of the ’50s through the ’70s when the world scientific consensus was that we were heading for another ice age”

    There actually was never a scientific consensus that another ice age was imminent. During the time period you mention, there were more scientific papers published on global warming than on global cooling. The ones on global cooling have since been proven incorrect.

Post a Comment