Showing posts with label Science Is Not Settled. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Science Is Not Settled. Show all posts

Wednesday, 26 December 2012

Sceptics Should Die!


Richard Parncutt is, apparently, an ex-pat Australian with a rather interesting and not so flattering  academic history - if you can be bothered to research it!

Quite frankly, so-called academics such as this Professor do more to promote CAGW scepticism when they place their idiocies on the Internet and subject them to 'peer-review'!  You could call this one an own goal, if you like!

This man is not a climate scientist by any stretch of the imagination, yet he would like to condemn to death scientists who are absolutely qualified to research in the field and express opinions.

It appears someone at the University of Graz, Austria recognised the good Professor's utter stupidity was potentially damaging to the University's reputation and removed Parncutt's inflammatory rant from his University website - possibly due to several violations not least violation of human rights!

This man, along with some other 'erudite' Professors not qualified in the field of climate science, such as Stephan Lewandowsky from the University of Western Australia, appear to be indicative of a systematic failure in quality education over the past couple of decades.

No wonder we worry for the fate of our children in the real world when there is a distinct lack of quality educators.

I am now going to prepare myself for impending execution because I have the unmitigated audacity to question the methods some people are applying to the 'science' of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming and consequential ramifications to world economies!

The piece below is reblogged from Jo Nova's excellent science site.  See link below.
......................................................................................

Death threats anyone? Austrian Prof: global warming deniers should be sentenced to death

Richard Parncutt,  Professor of Systematic Musicology, University of Graz, Austria, reckons people like Watts, Tallbloke, Singer, Michaels, Monckton, McIntyre and me (there are too many to list) should be executed. He’s gone full barking mad, and though he says these are his “personal opinions” they are listed on his university web site.

For all the bleating of those who say they’ve had real “death threats“, we get discussions about executing skeptics from Professors, wielding the tyrannical power of the state. Was he paid by the state to write these simplistic, immature, “solutions”? Do taxpayers fund his web expenses? (And what the heck is systematic musicology?)

Prof Richard Parncutt says:
“I have always been opposed to the death penalty in all cases…”

“Even mass murderers [like Breivik] should not be executed, in my opinion.”

“GW deniers fall into a completely different category from Behring Breivik. They are already causing the deaths of hundreds of millions of future people. We could be speaking of billions, but I am making a conservative estimate.”

Consequences

If a jury of suitably qualified scientists estimated that a given GW denier had already, with high probability (say 95%), caused the deaths of over one million future people, then s/he would be sentenced to death. The sentence would then be commuted to life imprisonment if the accused admitted their mistake, demonstrated genuine regret, AND participated significantly and positively over a long period in programs to reduce the effects of GW (from jail) – using much the same means that were previously used to spread the message of denial. At the end of that process, some GW deniers would never admit their mistake and as a result they would be executed. Perhaps that would be the only way to stop the rest of them. The death penalty would have been justified in terms of the enormous numbers of saved future lives.

Recant you foolish deniers or we’ll kill you! Yeah. Welcome to modern scientific debate.

Who should die? Anyone named on Desmog:

Much more would have happened by now if not for the GW deniers. An amazing number of people still believe that GW is a story made up by scientists with ulterior motives. For a long list of climate change deniers and their stories see desmogblog.

So the denier database becomes the “death list”. The list decided by PR experts on a funded smear site, who profit from marketing Green corporations.

But it’s ok, he includes a caveat where he says he didn’t say what I quoted above, so he can later pretend he isn’t discussing real deaths of real people:

Please note that I am not directly suggesting that the threat of execution be carried out. I am simply presenting a logical argument. I am neither a politician nor a lawyer. I am just thinking aloud about an important problem.

And we all feel so much better don’t we?

But seriously, Global warming deniers are the worst vermin on the face of the Earth, worse than holocaust deniers, tobacco deniers and worse than someone who bombs buildings and shoots children en masse:

I don’t think that mass murderers of the usual kind, such Breivik, should face the death penalty. Nor do I think tobacco denialists are guilty enough to warrant the death penalty, in spite of the enormous number of deaths that resulted more or less directly from tobacco denialism. GW is different. With high probability it will cause hundreds of millions of deaths. For this reason I propose that the death penalty is appropriate for influential GW deniers.

Here’s how the deadly reasoning goes
How does he know we are facing disaster?
He knows, because he’s read a blog that pretends to be scientific and it says so. The same site resorts to ad homs, and kindergarden namecalling (like “denier” and “Christie Crocks”) and is debunked all over the internet, but the Prof is too poorly trained in reasoning to spot the cheap tricks, and he didn’t think to search for “SkepticalScience debunked”. Oops.

More at Jo Nova, including comments, here:-

http://joannenova.com.au/2012/12/death-threats-anyone-austrian-prof-global-warming-deniers-should-be-sentenced-to-death/

Wednesday, 19 December 2012

Open Letter To Dr. Karl Kruszelnicki


(For those of you who have no idea who I am talking about – here’s Dr. Karl’s Wiki entry.)

Dear Dr. Karl,

For many years, I’ve had the greatest respect for you.  I’ve found you enlightening, entertaining and downright good value.

I’ve just seen your television appearance tonight on the ABC News 24 “The Drum” hosted by Steve Cannane.  I am re-evaluating my opinion,  regrettably.

I’ve always believed good science practitioners openly admit to being sceptical and, in their view must embrace scepticism in order to remain credible.    From your comments on perceived disinformation and the current meme of Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming (CAGW), you rattled off stuff like 80% of the Arctic has melted during the past Arctic summer, permafrost is in a raging melt, releasing copious amounts of methane and a little ocean gastropod can’t reproduce its shell because of this thing called global warming due to acidification of the oceans.  All the absolute fault of Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming, of course.  Hellacious, any sensible person would agree – if it were true.

Right up front, I admit I am not a qualified, experienced scientist as I know you are, although I do work in the field, so to speak,  as a lay botanist and entomologist.  That qualifies me for nothing – and I accept that.  However, it worries me when a great mind such as yours slams shut.  I didn’t hear you state anywhere in your Drum segment that we must respect the diversity of qualified scientific opinion.  As you know, scientific opinion is constantly being reviewed.  I am not a flat-earther.    I regularly state that this Planet’s climate is changing constantly – has done since the Globe cooled down enough to establish life forms – and climate will continue to change until the Globe dies.

Dr. Karl, there is new information coming out pretty regularly which is challenging the dogma of man-made global warming.  Have you read up on any of it?   You are aware that Planet Earth has not significantly warmed for over 16 years – which is in direct contradiction to the hysterical reports from the IPCC that have influenced the economic policies of most of the affluent countries.  That fact in itself, deserves some serious scrutiny.  You are aware of the admission as to the numerous errors in the IPCC’s AR4 report, aren’t you?  You are aware of the considerable storms the Arctic has been exposed to during the past Arctic summer which is probably a more likely contributing factor to some melt rather than the amount of carbon dioxide currently in the atmosphere.  It’s going to be bad news if there is a big freeze during the Arctic winter.  Some people may have egg on face – but who am I, a poorly educated lover of all things natural, to comment – let alone criticise?  However, I am not one to follow the bouncing ball on instruction without questioning why the ball is actually bouncing.  I mean no offence.

Dr. Karl, you have a very good brain, there’s no doubt about that.  I had hoped you would have been slightly sceptical on such an important matter.  I’d have thought with your ability to actually conduct meaningful research, you should have found papers written by scientists who are not welded on to the notion man is entirely responsible for destruction of this Planet’s climate.  Scientists that are presenting empirical scientific research rather then reliance solely on computer models of dubious accuracy and created to scare the bejesus out of each and every one of us.  Computer models on which many of these so-called experts have hoisted their reputations and now watching their houses of cards crumble as fact blows a pure, clean wind. 

 I’d have hoped you might have taken a look at the role the Sun may just play in the Earth's climate; the role of the el Nino – la Nina phenomena.  I hadn’t thought you would slam your intellect shut to anything that didn’t emanate from people such as James Hansen and Michael Mann, both fairly well on the outer as “experts” in their field.  I had thought you would question the inane prophesies of people such as Tim Flannery and I had hoped I would not have to slot you into the same category as that sorely repugnant person, Robyn Williams who frequently inflicts his bias and absent research on unsuspecting listeners to the ABC’s Radio National Science Show.  Williams really did it when he donated ABC airtime to Professor Stephan Lewandowksy!   Oh – my – God.  That’s when Williams lost what small amount of credibility he’d managed to cling to and threw himself over the cliff.  Keeping people such as Robyn Williams on the payroll is why the ABC continues to sacrifice itself on the Alter of Biased Leftard Green Wanker group-think..  Blatant socialism within the ranks of the Australian public broadcaster. Adherence to the ABC’s Code of Practice doesn’t exist.   It's no surprise taxpayers who have to fund such bile are so disgusted and disillusioned.  They are paying for propaganda they do not support nor accept.  No wonder, ex-Chairman, Maurice Newman is so disillusioned!

Dr. Karl – I expected better from you.  It’s your job to teach us plebs how to question, how to evaluate, I would have thought.  You have no idea how disillusioned I am thinking you might be pushing a form of science that may well be revealed to be complete bullshit.   An utter con orchestrated by the United Nations.  They have to convince western democracies to embrace  their appallingly Socialist Agenda 21.  What better way than the manifestation of ultimate deception?  It’s shaping up that way right now.  I would be happy to be proved wrong, but somehow, I don’t think that’s going to eventuate.  We are dealing with the UN and each and every one of us should be awake at their post!

I despair for this Planet.  I really do.  When genius minds such as Dr. Karl Kruszelnicki’s are not prepared to visit the contra-science on CAGW and openly comment on it without fear nor favour (not that I have seen from this scientist, anyway) we must wonder what or who got to them!   Has the almighty dollar stretched so far as to influence the best and most brilliant minds involved in Australian science?
                     
The truth is out there, Dr. Karl.  It depends whether or not you have the cojones to step outside your comfort zone.

For a bit of extra reading, Dr. Karl – go here!  You might be in for a bit of a reality check with regard to the idiocy of some so-called experts who are sucking from the public teat.

Dr. Karl features in the last segment on this episode of The Drum.