Last month I noted here the increasing desperation of the Climatistas, who tried to scare us with a study showing that global warming will cause an increase in the crime rate decades from now. But philosophy professor Lawrence Torcello of the Rochester Institute of Technology has taken the desperation one step further, arguing that climate skeptics should be criminally prosecuted:
If those with a financial or political interest in inaction had funded an organised campaign to discredit the consensus findings of seismology, and for that reason no preparations were made, then many of us would agree that the financiers of the denialist campaign were criminally responsible for the consequences of that campaign. I submit that this is just what is happening with the current, well documented funding of global warming denialism. . .
We have good reason to consider the funding of climate denial to be criminally and morally negligent. The charge of criminal and moral negligence ought to extend to all activities of the climate deniers who receive funding as part of a sustained campaign to undermine the public’s understanding of scientific consensus.
A twofer! Not only are we asked to trash the scientific traditions of skepticism, but the rule of law along with it. Free speech? Nah—not for skeptics:
My argument probably raises an understandable, if misguided, concern regarding free speech. We must make the critical distinction between the protected voicing of one’s unpopular beliefs, and the funding of a strategically organised campaign to undermine the public’s ability to develop and voice informed opinions. Protecting the latter as a form of free speech stretches the definition of free speech to a degree that undermines the very concept.
This is of course laughable; given that the climate science and policy community receives billions a year for climatism, Prof. Torcello ought to look in the mirror when making charges of financial gain. Plus, what about the speech of those many analysts like Anthony Watts or JoNova who receive no funding from anyone for their work? Something tells me Torcello would hand them over to the Climate Grand Inquisitor, too.
Maybe my favorite part is his shout-out to Michael Mann:
Many scientists recognize these civic and moral obligations. Climatologist Michael Mann is a good example; Mann has recently made the case for public engagement in a powerful New York Times opinion piece: If You See Something Say Something.
Ah yes—that would be the Michael Mann who claimed to be a Nobel Prize winner in court filings in his suit against Mark Steyn and even mocked up his own certificate for his office wall, only to be disavowed by the Nobel Committee, which sent this in response to a reporter inquiry:
1) Michael Mann has never been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
2) He did not receive any personal certificate. He has taken the diploma awarded in 2007 to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (and to Al Gore) and made his own text underneath this authentic-looking diploma.
3) The text underneath the diploma is entirely his own. We issued only the diploma to the IPCC as such. No individuals on the IPCC side received anything in 2007.
So much for truth telling from the Climatistas.
It’s only March, but I think Torcello is the early front-runner for Power Line’s Green Weenie of the Year.