12/8/2007
UN Blackballs International Scientists from Climate Change Conference
Voice of dissent excluded from participation in Bali
(CHICAGO, Illinois - December 5, 2007) — The United Nations has rejected all attempts by a group of dissenting scientists seeking to present information at the climate change conference taking place in Bali, Indonesia.
They’ve been doing this all along. This is about shutting out opinions that don’t agree with the direction they’re headed in like a runaway train.
The International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC) has been denied the opportunity to present at panel discussions, side events, and exhibits; its members were denied press credentials. The group consists of distinguished scientists from Africa, Australia, India, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
The scientists, citing pivotal evidence on climate change published in peer-reviewed journals, have expressed their opposition to the UN’s alarmist theory of anthropogenic global warming. As the debate on man-made global warming has been heating up, the UN has tried to freeze out the scientists and new evidence, summarily dismissing them with the claim “the science is settled.”
And it is not settled by a longshot. As long as you squeeze predetermined results into your models, it’s not called “science” and people should be free to point that out.
Silencing freedom of speech and ‘dissent’ when it’s leftists who say ‘dissent is patriotic’, lol…I guess that only applies if you’re a marxist anti-war activist.
James M. Taylor, senior fellow at the Heartland Institute:
“It is not surprising the UN has completely rejected dissenting voices. They have been doing this for years. The censorship of scientists is necessary to promote their political agenda. After the science reversed on the alarmist crowd, they claimed ‘the debate is over’ to serve their wealth redistribution agenda.”
Taylor continued, “For example, ICSC scientist Dr. Vincent Gray recently published Unsound Science by the IPCC, which proves the main claims by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change are scientifically unsound. Dr. Gray is an expert reviewer for the IPCC and has submitted more than 1,800 comments on IPCC reports. He is an expert on the IPCC methodology and published Spinning the Climate.
Dr. Gray also calls for the IPCC’s abolition. It is not a scientific body of scholars, it is a political activist body furthering a political agenda that has taken a departure from science. Which is true of a lot of leftist agendas, might I add.
“Dr. Gray is the last person the politicized UN wants speaking,” Taylor noted. “He single-handedly debunks the entire alarmist theory. And there are more than 600 Dr. Grays trying to be the voice of reason and science. All are being censored.”
Where is the outrage?
“The ICSC scientists don’t agree with the pre-determined ‘Bali Mandate,’ so instead of discussion and debate, we get censorship. Until the UN rejects the politicization of climate change, their reports, protocols, and mandates aren’t worth reading–much less ratifying.”
It is alarming that 600 scientists are being censored in Bali for not being ‘politically correct’ and agreeing with Al Gorical type alarmism on the subject.
Isn’t it a shame that it’s come to this. The UN has fulfilled what I was predicting over 20 years ago: it is not only stealing from people on false pretenses (as in the Oil for Food program example), it is lying to them to further its agenda, as well.
Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, Stop the ACLU, The Virtuous Republic, Rosemary’s Thoughts, Right Truth, The Pet Haven Blog, Shadowscope, Stuck On Stupid, Leaning Straight Up, The Amboy Times, Chuck Adkins, Pursuing Holiness, The Uncooperative Radio Show! Special Weekend!, Adeline and Hazel, , third world county, Woman Honor Thyself, Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Celebrity Smack, CommonSenseAmerica, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, Church and State, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, The Random Yak, 123beta, Adam’s Blog, , Big Dog’s Weblog, Phastidio.net, The Bullwinkle Blog, , Nuke’s, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, Faultline USA, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, Global American Discourse, High Desert Wanderer, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Heartland’s moonbat attack squads « Cao2’s Weblog linked with Heartland’s moonbat attack squads « Cao2’s Weblog
Grizzly Groundswell linked with Heartland’s moonbat attack squads
December 11th, 2007 at 4:30 am
The Heartland Institute is yet another Exxon front. Are you too? Or are you just too stupid and lazy to do basic research?
December 11th, 2007 at 7:05 am
I’m not only stupid and lazy, I’m toothless and drive a pickup.
It’s typical that a lefty (from the UK, I guess) would attack the Heartland Institute, a 501(c)(3) organization…but then libs today attack anything that doesn’t fit within their goal of ‘redistributing the wealth’.
Is Heartland a Frontgroup?
And more, here, in defense of malicious stuff like that which you put forth:
I find tht leftists like to smear people in order to undermine their credibility, but you’re just demonstrating an age-old leftist tactic.
From their website:
I applaud them.
It’s perfectly okay for a nonprofit to promote GOOD things instead of domestic terrorism to ‘rage against the machine’ like George Soros’ nonprofits, lol
Heartland has been endorsed by some of the country’s leading scholars, public policy experts, and elected officials. Dr. Milton Friedman called Heartland “a highly effective libertarian institute.” Cato Institute president Edward Crane says Heartland “has had a tremendous impact, first in the Midwest, and now nationally.”
Activities of The Heartland Institute are overseen by a 15-member Board of Directors, which meets quarterly. The full-time staff works with editors and Senior Fellows, including Dr. Richard Dolinar (health care), Dr. Jay Lehr (environment), Maureen Martin (legal affairs), John Rutledge (technology and economy), and Brian Wesbury (taxes and economy).
Two committees provide outside advice and expertise: a Board of Policy Advisors and the Board of Legislative Advisors. The former consists of more than 100 academics and professional economists who conduct research and participate in peer review of the institute’s publications. The latter consists of more than 500 elected officials who suggest topics and sources of information and sometimes produce model legislation.
Funding for Heartland’s programs comes from approximately 1,600 individuals, foundations, and corporations. In 2006, 25 percent of the organization’s income came from corporations and 75 percent from individuals and foundations. Heartland does not accept government funds and does not conduct “contract” research for special-interest groups.
For more information about Heartland, please visit our FAQs feature.
If you believe in empowering people with ideas based on the principles of individual rights and limited government, please consider becoming a Member or a Donor to The Heartland Institute. Achieving the great American goal of “liberty and justice for all” requires that people like you help defend the institutions of freedom.
——————-
Looks like I have to find it within my budget to join, since I’m here in Illinois and am interesting in these concepts.
Since Heartland mentions the CATO institute and other things that are completely up my alley like ‘limited government’, renowned free market economist Milton Friedman, etc., the more I see, the better I like it.
Thanks for forcing me to read about them.
Lefties sure do teach me a lot with their vitriolic hate. Everything they abhor, I should take a closer look at supporting.
Saying that they represent the Oil Companies is typical, too, LOL. What you’re really saying is you’re against free speech, real science, and capitalism.
December 11th, 2007 at 4:41 pm
[…] I like to investigate what moonbats are saying so that I can translate it to rational thinking. A commenter claimed that the Heartland Institute is a ‘frontgroup for Exxon’, and accused me of being ‘too stupid and lazy’ to do basic research. This would seem to me to be someone with an IQ of about 75; didn’t provide any links or facts to back up this wild assertion, and engaged in a pathetic ad hominem attack which is against my rules of engagement and against the rules set forth in front of 8th grade debate teams. This is the default position for a leftist: when you can’t debate points (and most of the time they can’t), and instead, prefer to engage in personal attacks to discredit a source. We don’t need to stereotype them; they stereotype themselves with completely redundant and recognizable behavior. One has to question the intelligence of someone who a) thinks that constitutes debate and b) makes points for his side and c) thinks that’s going to convince anyone as to the validity and veracity of his position. […]
December 11th, 2007 at 5:16 pm
[…] I like to investigate what moonbats are saying so that I can translate it to rational thinking. A commenter claimed that the Heartland Institute is a ‘frontgroup for Exxon’, and accused me of being ‘too stupid and lazy’ to do basic research. This would seem to me to be someone with an IQ of about 75; didn’t provide any links or facts to back up this wild assertion, and engaged in a pathetic ad hominem attack which is against my rules of engagement and against the rules set forth in front of 8th grade debate teams. This is the default position for a leftist: when you can’t debate points (and most of the time they can’t), and instead prefer to engage in personal attacks to discredit a source. We don’t need to stereotype them; they stereotype themselves with completely redundant and recognizable behavior. One has to question the intelligence of someone who a) thinks that constitutes debate and b) thinks it makes points for his side and c) thinks that’s going to convince anyone as to the validity and veracity of his position. […]