Update : A more complete video has been released and it tells a very different story. My characterization below and the title of this article are incorrect.
———————————————————————-
Check out this video. An LSU professor segregates his class by global warming beliefs, tells the skeptics that they are killing their children and billions of others, and openly mocks them in front of the class.
This guy needs professional psychiatric help, not cap and trade.
h/t to Marc Morano
Even though this is an edited video,
I think he should be suspended for totally innapropriate and destructive behavior totally inconsistent with any reasonable form of teaching.
Congrats Steve, you posted something valuable and pertinent to the issue that I fully agree with.
Wow, dude’s lucky my children to go there, they would have handed him his azz. BTW, happy climategate day!
Sounds like another 10-10 moment. But then idiots do not realize they are idiots.
I sure hope Baton Rouge knows its village idiot is “teaching” at the local university.
its a new type of mental disorder “climate guilt comlex”. like other depressive disease it can easy flip into violent action against himself or other who are more guilty in his eyes.
He was a total tit but depressingly the sceptic arguments were very weak too. This vid shows how little both sceptics and believers know about the facts of climate change.
It actually REALLY pisses me off when I see teachers bully students. It is unconscionable.
I think it is totally appropriate for professors to have opinions and to state them forcefully in certain situations, but it is imperative to respect ALL students whether one agrees with them or not.
I had a history teacher in high school who would try to berate me because my thinking did not fit with the fundamentalist bent of the school I was in. I have seen this happen with many people who believe their ideology trumps basic human decency.
And they wonder why there aren’t more young sceptical climate scientists. It takes a lot of confidence to go against your teachers and independant thought is rarely rewarded.
Tony Duncan
I hope that includes Al Gore’s movie.
Nope.
A shining moment for the climate hawks indeed. The refusal of Americans to lower their standard of living and leading to nuclear retribution is a new approach though. I sure hope more climate hawks use that one.
Of course, even were the “hockey stick graph” computer models not complete frauds (even before the Climategate information dump gave us a look at their super top-secret “We’re never gonna let you see it, so there!” programming code, the skeptics had reverse-engineered the charlatans’ published data to show that even when fed random Brownian numbers – “red noise” – those fancy computer models would read out “hockey stick” results), every damned aspect of the alarmists’ sorry blunder of an excuse for a hypothesis showed that the complete obliteration of all American carbon dioxide emissions would produce precisely NO significant mitigation of the “climate catastrophe” the planet was supposed to suffer in the next century or two.
Yeah, that’s right. Reduce the average American’s “carbon footprint” to zero, and the carbon dioxide induced climate forcing of the AGW hypothesis happens anyway.
There’s a saying in medicine regarding treatment measures.
If the clinical outcome you reasonably expect after performing a particular therapeutic intervention – a transfusion, giving a medicine, performing a surgical procedure – is going to be pretty much the same as if you hadn’t undertaken that treatment, subjecting the patient to that procedure is by definition malpractice and you really, really ought not to do it.
So let’s apply the same criterion of assessment to the completely fraudulent “Cargo Cult Science” of man-made climate disruption, and judge schmucks like Dr. Schaeffer – and you, too, Sundance – according to the same standards of professional ethics to which we hold the average family doctor, okay?
So how are you fixed for professional liability insurance, Sundance? What, you’re saying that we can’t sue you for civil tort, with the prospect of collecting both compensatory and punitive damages?
Tsk. You haven’t practiced medicine, have you? Lawyers can sue anybody for anything, any time they pick up the scent of blood in the water.
—
Climatology is the shadiest branch of science, fattened with excessive government green monies and devoid of knowledge or conscience
No Fool Like A New World Order TOOL
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/30062
I really hope the repubs get their act together and hear the message that was sent to them. If they don’t get rid of the rhinos, and get started to work as soon as they take their seats, the next election won’t go any better for them than it did for the dems in this election.
More indoctrination
http://www.thirdage.com/news/al-gore-host-live-interactivetown-hall-meeting-today_11-17-2010
This guy really took the acorn to the head pretty hard.
If this guy is the Bradley E. Schaefer whose Wikipedia page describes him as “a professor of astronomy and astrophysics at Louisiana State University who had “…received his PhD from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1983,” I’ve got to wonder just what the hell he was supposed to be teaching in that classroom as he was so juicily recorded.
I don’t see anything in the way of support for his assertions. His intimation that India and Pakistan – as nation-states presently able to construct nuclear weapons – “fifty years from now, they may want to send a couple nukes our way” because the people of these United States will have failed to do enough to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and thus will be held responsible for whatever “climate catastrophe” is supposed to hammer these two countries – is so wonderfully ridiculous that it almost beggars imagination.
Almost. After thirty years of watching the progress of the “Cargo Cult Science” of anthropogenic global warming, I’m not willing to credit that the committed charlatans and suckers responsible for pushing this crap are beyond any deceit or stupidity. They have decoupled themselves so completely from factual reality that there is no boundary they will not transgress, even the borderline between sanity and psychosis.
I wonder what would happen if the students in that classroom had been undergraduates at Norwich, or Texas A&M, or Annapolis, or West Point, or any other school where a grounding in military history and theory of armed conflict is taught.
Well, young Cadets and Midshipmen would certainly be too well-disciplined to give Dr. Schaeffer any of the flack that remark so thoroughly warrants. Though I’m pretty sure he’d get a resounding dose of what the Army used to call “silent insolence” back before the 1928 revision of The Manual for Courts-Martial.
This guy is a professor? In one of the hardest of “hard” sciences? At a big-name university?
“So far what I’ve been telling you is just the science. Science I can be very definitive on. There’s universal agreement among scientists.”
Oh, how truly wonderful. Perhaps among the “scientists” whom Dr. Schaeffer is willing to read, and those with whom he’s willing to converse. A rapidly shrinking minority, as the research grants begin drying up with the beginning of the 112th Congress in January 2010 seating a whole boatload of Tea Party types in the House and calling into question all funding for “global warming research.”
To the rest of the scientific world, of course, Dr. Schaeffer has obviously been plugging both ears with his fingers and screaming “Neener-Neener-Neener-I-can’t-HEAR-you!”
And “just the science,” is it? Whee! Has anybody heard any science in this rant of Dr. Schaeffer’s? Anything at all?
Hm. D’you think he might respond politely to a request for an e-mail transmittal of the PowerPoint presentation he’d used for this lecture? I mean, just as an academic courtesy?
—
Tucci78
email us at ycl.lsu@gmail.com and we can get you the class notes for that day
A student is complaining here, Schaefer called him stupid. All of the students in group one were pissed.
The video was not a hack job, think of it more as a highlight clip.
I would be on Steve’s side about the indoctrination of young people but I strongly suspect that this has been spun into something it isn’t.
It looks like a class debate to me. Each side seems to have a spokesperson and there seems to be plenty of humour between the groups and the teacher. Because the video has been edited we do not know if we only seen one side of the debate, nor the results of it.
The word for this is APOLOGIST! He was just being sarcastic and poking fun at the ACC promoters or trying to prepare his students to debate ACC propaganda!!!!
Right you are LAZ MA BOY! It must not be what it appears to be! And PIGS can fly. Just because there are no reported witnesses is not proof they can not!!!!
I too would like to see an unedited version. But the actions and tone of the professor, unless he was exaggerating his reactions to show how people can try to intimidate you out of your opinions, and he did it to the side SUPPORTING ACC as well, then this is totally unacceptable.
Mike, I am not an APOLOGIST, I’m a skeptic, something science deniers like to be called but never live up to.
And it seems I was right to be skeptical because Steve has now issued a retraction. It does look like this was a debate and was edited to show only one side with the intention of getting those without critical thinking to react in exactly they way they did. It looks like this teacher was actually challenging his students to think for themselves and form their own counter arguments, which is exactly the opposite of indoctrination which is what some have claimed here. You wanted to take this video at face value simply because you thought it supported your beliefs.
Speaking of apologists, I’m man enough to accept one if you are man enough to make it.
He should work with Jim Cameron and Al Gore. Aided by Jones, Mann and Hansen.
Oh! They are already?
This professor’s behavior is far from unique. This has been going on for years.
I experienced similar browbeating of students who did not agree with the professor’s political persuasion years ago as an undergrad at a prominent state university. The topic was different, but the petit tyran was just as abusive and threatening when a hapless student had the temerity to state his honest views.
Schaefer is best remembered for berating conference members not to use the shower while his girlfriend was using it. Made a complete ass of himself. And he is a tad over rated as a scientist.