Global Warming Denialists give up on pretend science.

Billboards in Chicago paid for by The Heartland Institute point out that some of the world’s most notorious criminals say they “still believe in global warming” – and ask viewers if they do, too…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.


Share This


  1. That_Bloke

    But then the old Hitler was a vegetarian who believed in animal rights thing never changed anyone’s mind on the merits of not mistreating animals.

  2. Leonid

    Not exactly. It was more nuanced than that. He said that social Darwinism was present in the two greatest atheist movements of the last century.

    Dawkins allowed that Hitler’s philosophy was social Darwinist and rejected the "atheist" badge on Hitler, while also stating that Stalin’s atheism had nothing to do with his movement.

    I think Pell was arguing that atheism as a "theology" allows for social darwinism as a natural extension. I thin that’s a fair point. It does. Doesn’t mean it has to – it’s another bad slippery slope argument.

  3. Leonid

    Less pirates does equal global warming. The lines on that damned graph look identical.

    Likewise the number of Republicans in the Senate is proportional to sunspot activity.

  4. Leonid

    I dunno. I think their best argument was pointing out that according the Hansen’s scenario A – the business-as-usual scenario, the temp mid-point last year was supposed to have increased to 1.15C average over 1960 temperatures.

    Hansen made a backup plan. It was called imaginatively enough, scenario B, and was based on reduced CO2 growth. It was supposed to model temps to an average 1C over 1960 temperatures by mid-last year.

    He also made a plan for CO2 equilibrium, showing how temperatures would go if the world went CO2 neutral by 2000. He called it scenario C. It was supposed to model temps to an average of 0.5C over 1960 by mid last year.

    The problem is is that his plan C most closely matches the observed temperatures, while the CO2 output is growing and growing as per scenario A.

    I think you’ll agree that’s been the sceptics’ greatest achievement – pointing out that the models don’t match reality. Even the consensus scientists now agree what could be seen for many years by simple plain comparison.

    The world’s in a plateau at the end of a warming phase or in the middle of a warming phase or at the beginning of a cooling phase. What’s certain is it’s not warming as quickly or how the alarmists expected it to.

Leave a Reply