144 replies to this topic

[NewfoundlandFrog]

In a strikingly parallel piece of logic to other "logic" we've seen here, Heartland Institute has put out a billboard campaign "linking" accepting global warming research to Unabomber, Castro, Manson, etc. That is, the IPCC is simply a mouthpiece for some rather serious criminals by repeating their talking points.

The UK Guardian calls it "quite possibly one of the most ill-judged poster campaigns in the history of ill-judged poster campaigns." I'm not so sure, it's the sort of "reasoning" that is commonplace here,  in the media,  and now seems acceptable to many on this side of the pond in everyday places these days.

Here is their "reasoning" unvarnished and straight from the source...

1. Who appears on the billboards?
The billboard series features Ted Kaczynski, the infamous Unabomber; Charles Manson, a mass murderer; and Fidel Castro, a tyrant. Other global warming alarmists who may appear on future billboards include Osama bin Laden and James J. Lee (who took hostages inside the headquarters of the Discovery Channel in 2010).

These rogues and villains were chosen because they made public statements about how man-made global warming is a crisis and how mankind must take immediate and drastic actions to stop it.

2. Why did Heartland choose to feature these people on its billboards?
Because what these murderers and madmen have said differs very little from what spokespersons for the United Nations, journalists for the “mainstream” media, and liberal politicians say about global warming. They are so similar, in fact, that a Web site has a quiz that asks if you can tell the difference between what Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber, wrote in his “Manifesto” and what Al Gore wrote in his book, Earth in the Balance.

The point is that believing in global warming is not “mainstream,” smart, or sophisticated. [Can you say "elitist"??? Apparently not!] In fact, it is just the opposite of those things. Still believing in man-made global warming – after all the scientific discoveries and revelations that point against this theory – is more than a little nutty. In fact, some really crazy people use it to justify immoral and frightening behavior.

Of course, not all global warming alarmists are murderers or tyrants. But the Climategate scandal and the more recent Fakegate scandal revealed that the leaders of the global warming movement are willing to break the law and the rules of ethics to shut down scientific debate and implement their left-wing agendas.

[Note: I find it interesting that so many people can "break the law" in multiple cases, admit to it, and not even be charged with an offence--let alone convicted--by some legal body with jurisdiction...Perhaps Heartland doesn't really think it's audience is capable of this small observation. I fear they may be correct, but that's not a good thing.]

...it goes on and on (speaking of the Unabomber), but you get the gist!

Anyway, we'll see how the campaign goes for Heartland. Guess losing a lot of it's more mainstream support left them with only with those preferring a stronger message.

[Duquesne Frog]

Newf, I don't think you can deny all the critical contributions that Ted Kaczynski and Charles Manson had in developing the models showing the albedo effect on cloud formation ...

[TCUSA]

What's the difference between this campaign and the campaign we've seen from the global warming alarmists against so-called "deniers?"

[NewfoundlandFrog]

TCUSA, on 04 May 2012 - 12:17 PM, said:

What's the difference between this campaign and the campaign we've seen from the global warming alarmists against so-called "deniers?"

link??? Someone's putting up billboards of some criminal saying something Anthony Watts has said? Cannot say I've seen it.

Show something real.

[STL Frog]

NewfoundlandFrog, on 04 May 2012 - 12:20 PM, said:

link??? Someone's putting up billboards of some criminal saying something Anthony Watts has said? Cannot say I've seen it.

Show something real.

You really want to go toe to toe with me on global warming climate change climate disruption propaganda?  Please.  Maybe it's a good time for me to put on that blindfold...

Let's start with the short film (No Pressure) that depicted people getting killed for, as Wiki puts it, "failing to be sufficiently enthusiastic" about reducing carbon emissions shall we?

Criminal?  Yawn.  Too soft.  How about getting blown to bits for not drinking AGW koolaid.  Plenty more where that came from, prof.  Say the word.  

[NewfoundlandFrog]

STL Frog, on 04 May 2012 - 05:33 PM, said:

You really want to go toe to toe with me on global warming climate change climate disruption propaganda?  Please.  Maybe it's a good time for me to put on that blindfold...

Let's start with the short film (No Pressure) that depicted people getting killed for, as Wiki puts it, "failing to be sufficiently enthusiastic" about reducing carbon emissions shall we?

Criminal?  Yawn.  Too soft.  How about getting blown to bits for not drinking AGW koolaid.  Plenty more where that came from, prof.  Say the word.  

Missed the billboard campaign costimg some real dollars.  Did you???

[gohornedfrogs]

NewfoundlandFrog, on 04 May 2012 - 10:18 AM, said:

In a strikingly parallel piece of logic to other "logic" we've seen here, Heartland Institute has put out a billboard campaign "linking" accepting global warming research to Unabomber, Castro, Manson, etc. That is, the IPCC is simply a mouthpiece for some rather serious criminals by repeating their talking points.

I really don't have a dog in this hunt. I am, however, compelled to point out that I don't think the Heartland Institute is trying to imply that the IPCC is simply a mouthpiece for some rather serious criminals.

That's quite a stretch.

[NewfoundlandFrog]

gohornedfrogs, on 04 May 2012 - 06:05 PM, said:

I really don't have a dog in this hunt. I am, however, compelled to point out that I don't think the Heartland Institute is trying to imply that the IPCC is simply a mouthpiece for some rather serious criminals.

That's quite a stretch.

Disagree. View the campaign. Make your choicel

[gohornedfrogs]

NewfoundlandFrog, on 04 May 2012 - 06:25 PM, said:

Disagree. View the campaign. Make your choicel

Whatever floats your (new) boat.

[NewfoundlandFrog]

gohornedfrogs, on 04 May 2012 - 06:58 PM, said:

Whatever floats your (new) boat.

Not exactly: Whatever billboards you can point to!  I see, however that Sensenbrenner who was going to speak at their gathering withdrew and that they have now decided to abandon their, and I quote, "experiment".

Liftin is next Friday. Waiting is soooooo hard. Going out to do some wiring now, though.

[Frog79]

The IPCC is a left-wing political acivist group so it should come as no surprise that all manner of leftist loons, serial killers, terrorists, etc. really dig their propaganda.  I think the billboards are funny, lol.

[STL Frog]

NewfoundlandFrog, on 04 May 2012 - 05:43 PM, said:

Missed the billboard campaign costimg some real dollars.  Did you???

A new addition to Baghdad Bob's rules of debate:

"Yeah that global warming propaganda film shows children getting blown to bits, but how much did it cost to make??!!"

When getting worked over, just dodge, deflect, move target....even if money had anything to do with anything, No Pressure was directed an A-List Hollywood director who has major studio films under his belt. Oh, and Sony Pictures financially supported the effort - until they had to disassociate themselves once it became a pr nightmare.

Not that it matters of course.  Bob's just doing everything he can to avoid further embarrassment.  Prof, there's much, much more. You gonna run away from yet another challenge?

Quote

Disagree. View the campaign. Make your choicel

Heartland drawing some loose connections on a few billboards or a major Hollywood producer/director making a film that explicitly depicts kids in a classroom getting covered in blood and guts after their classmates explode all around them.  Yup, couldn't be any more similar...

Keep up the good work Bob.

[NewfoundlandFrog]

Frog79, on 05 May 2012 - 05:54 AM, said:

The IPCC is a left-wing political acivist group so it should come as no surprise that all manner of leftist loons, serial killers, terrorists, etc. really dig their propaganda.  I think the billboards are funny, lol.

I think you need to provide a little more evidence than a mere assertion that the 195 countries making up the IPCC are all "left-wing activists". Further, the billboards provide rather complete proof Heartland has nothing whatever to do with science whatever else it alleges about itself. Try real hard and see if you can find a single scientific body that has produced an equivalent campaign as has been alleged. It's a wrong allegation.

[Frog79]

NewfoundlandFrog, on 05 May 2012 - 12:01 PM, said:

Try real hard and see if you can find a single scientific body that has produced an equivalent campaign as has been alleged. It's a wrong allegation.

Wrong allegation?  No, it is you who is wrong about this as usual.  Do you deny that left wing nutcases such as the Unabomber and bin Ladin are not global warming alarmists?   Find me one political conservative in the IPCC who has any kind of prominent role in that activist organization.  You won't be able to.  The few non-alamists that have tried to participate were quickly silenced by the left wingers in the organization.

[NewfoundlandFrog]

Frog79, on 06 May 2012 - 08:03 AM, said:

Wrong allegation?  No, it is you who is wrong about this as usual.  Do you deny that left wing nutcases such as the Unabomber and bin Ladin are not global warming alarmists?   Find me one political conservative in the IPCC who has any kind of prominent role in that activist organization.  You won't be able to.  The few non-alamists that have tried to participate were quickly silenced by the left wingers in the organization.

From 2001-2008 Bush republicans. IPCC is a multigovernmental organization. Bushies reviewed the report at plenary session re IPCC 2007 and paid in about 12 million a year.



As noted above Bushies appointed the US representation to IPCC 2007 and provided funding. Reagan would have appointed the reps and provided funding to IPCC 1990, Bush senior would have made the original appoiontments and provided funding to IPCC 1995 and I never heard that Clinton made any changes to them. Basically conservatives have controlled the US appointments and funding to IPCC for a substantial portion of their total work.

Some definitions:

“Members of the IPCC” are countries who are Members of WMO and/or UNEP.

“Session of a Working Group” refers to a series of meetings at the plenary level of the governmental representatives to a Working Group of the IPCC.

“Session of the Panel” refers to a series of meetings at the plenary level of the governmental representatives to the IPCC.

[Duquesne Frog]

Appeals to authority are logical fallacies, regardless whether they are positive or negative authorities.  Should be obvious that the Unabomber's views on the matter are irrelevant, but it seems someone needs to point that out here ...

[pcf]

Duquesne Frog, on 06 May 2012 - 01:07 PM, said:

Appeals to authority are logical fallacies, regardless whether they are positive or negative authorities.  Should be obvious that the Unabomber's views on the matter are irrelevant, but it seems someone needs to point that out here ...

Trying to weasel out with fancy arguments? Science is communist, Nazi, elitist lies.

Americans should be doing 3 things. Prayin', drillin', consumerin'. Anything else is too much for them to handle.  

I see where the French done elected themselves a Socialist. At least they're honest about it, unlike Barry Soetoro eatin' his dog meat BBQ.

[NatonWolf]

Appeals to authority??

"The government is good at one thing. It knows how to break your legs, and then hand you a crutch and say, 'See if it weren't for the government, you wouldn't be able to walk'." ~ Harry Browne

[NewfoundlandFrog]

NatonWolf, on 06 May 2012 - 02:23 PM, said:

Appeals to authority??

"The government is good at one thing. It knows how to break your legs, and then hand you a crutch and say, 'See if it weren't for the government, you wouldn't be able to walk'." ~ Harry Browne

I'm sure Harry told that to the soldier, fireman and/or policeman who saved his life. I'm sure he says it every time he gets on the Interstate, flies without great fear of collision under governmentally-imposed rules, or successfully uses an electromagnetic device assigned by the govt to a particular frequency without interference from other devices.

As for appeals to authority, Duq is pointing out that a certain poster seems to think they are fallacious (not Duq). They are not fallacious. They are a legal inductive argument along the same general lines as any other inductive argument: Appeals to authority are valid to the extent that (1) the authority is actually qualified to be quoted as a source and that (2) the authority's quote is generally considered correct by a consensus of those qualified to be quoted.

In the end, deductive reasoning is very limited with respect to discovering new things in new areas. It is only when first principles are established--the two most basic methods for which are induction or blind-faith assumption--that deductive reasoning becomes useful.

Of course assuming something, deducing the consequences of that assumption, and then measuring reality against those consequences is a very common argument form in science. And, of course any tobacco "researcher" or AGM (false) "skeptic"^* will assert you cannot "prove" in some pure Platonic deductive sense such assumptions. Duh. Yet planes still fly, people die of lung cancer--though fewer now in North America, and the temps go up.

---
^*You can buy such "science" on both subjects for the price of one body at Heartland Institute if you hire Singer or Bast.

[Duquesne Frog]

http://news.yahoo.co...-165826953.html

Unabomber billboard on climate change taken down; Heartland Institute loses Diageo’s support

By Dylan Stableford | The Cutline – 2 hrs 20 mins ago

A billboard suggesting that those who believe in global warming are as crazy as the Unabomber was taken down less than 24 hours after it went up--but not before the group behind the ad lost another prominent backer.

...

But the Heartland Institute, the conservative think tank that created the billboard, was unapologetic: "This provocative billboard was always intended to be an experiment," the group said in a statement. "And after just 24 hours the results are in: It got people's attention. This billboard was deliberately provocative, an attempt to turn the tables on the climate alarmists by using their own tactics but with the opposite message."

The ad was, in part, a stunt to get attention for Heartland's conference for climate change skeptics, slated for May 21-23 in Chicago.

According to the Chicago Tribune, Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) threatened to cancel his speech at the conference if Heartland didn't pull the ad.

"We know that our billboard angered and disappointed many of Heartland's friends and supporters, but we hope they understand what we were trying to do with this experiment," Heartland president Joseph Bast said in a statement. "We do not apologize for running the ad, and we will continue to experiment with ways to communicate the 'realist' message on the climate."

...