Re: Whoops! The Atlantic Makes Trump Look EPIC In Cover Intended as a Smear

On Tue, 24 Sep 2024, William Hyde wrote:

Obviously the public material only exists to pacify the masses.

>
Or to summarize your attitude:
>
"I won't read anything which might contradict the views that I hold".

No, in todays world, that is actually impossible. I am exposed to texts
and videos 24/7 and none have managed to convince me that we're doomed.

As witness your response to my comments on your "five points", which as a favour to all I will not bother to respond to.

Ok.

I don't. I can tell you many times people have been shouting, calling me
a denier, almost becoming violent.

>
Poor child.  Of course, it's not even news when people working for IPCC get death threats.

Ahh, sorry, then it is ok. Climate-hysteric! On the other hand, I am not
surprised. Anything goes when it comes to climate rationalists, but
critique of the climate nobility must be silenced, preferably with fines
and violence. The climate rationalist on the other hand, can apparently
be shot in the head. I get it.

The demonizing is 100% on the climate
hysterics, and what you are seeing is a reaction to that environment.

>
Sorry, so you mean "climate hysterics" or "eco-facists" or "Eco-authoritarians"? Or "Scientists seeking to rule us all in the new feudal state". I've lost track.  This demonizing business can be tricky!

Yes.

That, in it self, that people who disagree are threatened, made to look
like holocaust deniers,

>
It is for this reason that for many years I did not use the word "denier", but preferred "skeptic". I too did not like the association.
>
But to be a skeptic requires engagement with the evidence.  Your utter failure in this discussion to deal with the evidence I have repeatedly presented is an example.  The pattern of warming shows the long-predicted characteristics of greenhouse gases, as I have pointed out many times, but you never engage with this.  You simply deny.
>
Hence the label is appropriate.
>
and generally tried to be stopped at any price,

Ahh... I hear the green boots marching on the streets. On the other
hand, the nazis eventually lost power and so will eco-fascism. But I
honestly cannot blame your hostility. You are playing politics, and you
must say what they want to hear to get your rewards. That is obvious and
entirely natural.
As for evidence, likewise. I've presented iron clad proofs and arguments
and you have not been able to refute them.
Finally, it turned out, that in the end, your arguments boiled down to
models, which as we saw, is completely unscientific given the variables,
the subjective nature, and how badly models work.

That's us climatologists.  A wild and lawless bunch, the terrors of academia.

Of the world... not just academia. The climate rationalists are the new
jews. I wouldn't be surprised if we have to wear green stars of davids
eventually. ;)