Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Is misinformation about the climate criminally negligent?
Topic Started: Mar 30 2014, 07:33 PM (643 Views)
colo_crawdad
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Question. What, specifically, is/was/ the point of the OP?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Berton
Member Avatar
Thunder Fan
[ * ]
Telcoman, you constantly read and post from political blogs about climate change. Unlike you I have the training and experience to know how to question the findings of alarmists which is why I am skeptical about many of their predictions which are based on models, not measured data.
Edited by Berton, Apr 1 2014, 10:30 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
colo_crawdad
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
colo_crawdad
Apr 1 2014, 10:29 PM
Question. What, specifically, is/was/ the point of the OP?
I do not want to make a snide remark about Berton leaving prior to answering m question. I would really appreciate an answer, either from him or from someone who thinks they understand the point of the OP.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Berton
Member Avatar
Thunder Fan
[ * ]
More:

US Philosophy Professor: Jail 'Denialist' Climate Scientists for Criminal Negligence


Scientists who don't believe in catastrophic man-made global warming should be put in prison, a US philosophy professor argues on a website funded by the UK government.

Lawrence Torcello - assistant professor of philosophy at Rochester Institute of Technology, NY, writes in an essay at The Conversation that climate scientists who fail to communicate the correct message about "global warming" should face trial for "criminal negligence". (H/T Bishop Hill)

The Conversation - no relation of Breitbart's blogging chatroom - is a website promoting articles by academics and funded by nineteen of Britain's leading universities, as well as several government agencies, including the Higher Education Funding Council For England (HEFCE) and the Higher Education Funding Council For Wales (HEFCW) and Research Council UK.

Its motto is "Academic rigour, journalistic flair" - both qualities which are mysteriously absent from Torcello's essay, titled "Is Misinformation About The Climate Criminally Negligent?"......

LINK
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
colo_crawdad
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
What a horribly misleading headline and article. Thank goodness the source linked the actual essay. What the author had to say about criminal negligence was:
Quote:
 
With such high stakes, an organised campaign funding misinformation ought to be considered criminally negligent.

The Essay

Not a word in the essay about jailing scientists. Not a word about prosecuting scientists. Only a proposal to hold those who fund misleading campaigns of deniers should be considered criminally negligent.
Edited by colo_crawdad, Apr 1 2014, 11:22 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

The argument is based on a premise. Suppose scientists who knew an eruption of Mt St Helens was about to erupt, decided not to warn residents nearby or assure them there was no problem. That would have been criminal negligence. Pretty clear. However it is murkier when the time frame is extended. For example we know the Yellowstone Caldera will erupt, probably in the next 10 thousand years, but maybe next year. Are the powers to be neligent for not evacuating places like Jackson Hole? That is a lot more nebulous. On that basis, i do not think the argument holds water. It is best to fight people like this with solid scientific facts and evidence
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Thumper
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
colo_crawdad
Apr 1 2014, 10:42 PM
colo_crawdad
Apr 1 2014, 10:29 PM
Question. What, specifically, is/was/ the point of the OP?
I do not want to make a snide remark about Berton leaving prior to answering m question. I would really appreciate an answer, either from him or from someone who thinks they understand the point of the OP.
It is a troll! And you schmucks are falling for it. I will discuss rational stuff with Berton, but most things I stay away from. Why bother?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Berton
Member Avatar
Thunder Fan
[ * ]
"Of course, inappropriate metaphors and calls for climate skeptics to be punished are not new. A musicologist in Austria called for the death penalty for climate deniers, retracting it after people were upset, according to American Thinker. That article about the violent rhetoric used against climate skeptics also mentioned statements made by Climate Progress' Joe Romm and NASA's James Hansen."

LINK
Edited by Berton, Apr 1 2014, 11:52 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

There are always radicals, you should know, your political view point is rife with them. I try to ignore them all,right or left
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Thumper
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
A Musicologist in Bavaria!!!! Now this is someone I would strand up and take notice over. How about a Proctologist in Summer Shade Kentucky?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Fire And Ice General Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Website Traffic Analysis