Hansen Says People Who Intentionally Spread Misinformation About The Climate Should Be Put On Trial For High Crimes



About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

56 Responses to Hansen Says People Who Intentionally Spread Misinformation About The Climate Should Be Put On Trial For High Crimes

  1. Dave N says:

    Bring it on, Jim.. just so long as you know that you’re also in the firing line.

  2. Justa Joe says:

    So I guess Jim “death trains” Hansen will be surrendering himself to the authorities.

  3. Andy Weiss says:

    Maybe it should be a capital crime to frighten little children with imaginary grade B disaster movie scenarios, while getting fat and rich in the process.

  4. BT Harley says:

    this was 3 years ago, Jim, what happened?…

  5. bjedwards says:

    Why does Steven Goddard misrepresent climate science and support scam artist @AGW_IS_A_HOAX?

    The world’s climate scientists want to know.

  6. bjedwards says:

    So tell us why you feel the need to misrepresent climate science, Goddard.

  7. bjedwards says:

    There’s no reason you shouldn’t inform us why you choose to misrepresent climate science, is there?

    If you can’t support your claim that AGW is a hoax why misrepresent climate science?

  8. bjedwards says:

    Intent is not specific?

    That’s a new one.

  9. bjedwards says:

    No need to be secretive, Goddard. David Irving wasn’t secretive about his denialism. In fact, he wad quite proud of them.

  10. Since the IAC has spoken about the “IPCC’s slow and inadequate response to revelations of errors in the last assessment“, shouldn’t we follow Hansen’s lead and put Pachauri et al on trial too?

  11. bjedwards says:

    Others, except for your gullible followers, know about your blog and what it is. Many want to know why you choose to misrepresent climate science.

    • suyts says:

      Specifically, what is misrepresented?

      • bjedwards says:

        Do you agree with Goddard that AGW is a hoax?

      • suyts says:

        lol, I asked you a question and you answer it with an unrelated question?

        What specifically is being misrepresented here?

      • bjedwards says:

        So you didn’t catch on that Goddard claims AGW is a hoax?


      • Baa Humbug says:

        BJ I don’t know about Steve but I reckon anything above about 0.1DegC per century warming caused by mans activities is a hoax is a scam is a con job.
        The idea that warming is nothing but bad bad bad is a hoax is a scam is a con job.
        Convince me otherwise.

      • suyts says:

        Exactly. What bj doesn’t understand is that many people have many areas where they disagree with one tenet of CAGW or another. That warming is bad is beyond logic. Humanity has always thrived better in a warmer environment.

        As to the hoax and scams, the alarmism has brought us ethanol, which caused a higher price of food, carbon tax schemes…….. we hide divergences, we falsely include opinion pieces in the IPCC, we make stuff up about melting glaciers, historical temps get arbitrarily changed, MSNBC place penguins and polar bears together in an effort to sway opinion, there’s in insane group in Britain that makes snuff films and calls it humor. And I haven’t even got to the nasty stuff …… In my own little world, we exchange perfectly good electric meters that cost $20 and replace them with $250 meters with half the life expectancy. We’ve created a world glut and shortage of REE. (look it up bj, I haven’t time to explain what that is to you) We’ve planted whirlygigs and pinwheels that causes immeasurable suffering to the people dependent up the energy that fails at the worst possible time. All the while making electricity more reliant on nat. gas. Which, could be used in a more efficient form.

  12. bjedwards says:


    You’re really a newbie at this. It’s not surprising how gullible you are.

  13. I suggest a moratorium on the question mark, at least on this thread

  14. AndyW says:

    He certainly is at one end of the spectrum. I think it has all gone to his head, poor chap.


  15. bjedwards says:

    suyts and Baa Humbug illustrate my case for me.

    One can never underestimate the intelligence of you climate change deniers.

    • You talk endlessly and say nothing.

    • suyts says:

      If you can refute anything I stated, I’m all eyes and ears. You know bj, I first thought that you may have just been a confused young person that came here because you wanted to understand something. But, it appears you’re just part of the alarmist sheeple.

      You make no statements regarding the validity of the “science” you seem to agree with, in fact, you seem so out of depth when people approach you with science that you simply ignore it and rant about Steve. Which is fine, you offer yourself up for some humorous one-liners, but really, the longer you remain here without offering anything substantive towards the discourse, the more you make alarmists look frivolous, frothy and futile. You’ve brought no science to the discussion nor any genre of logic all the while, confirming the thought that alarmists are churlish and lack the proper command of language to state their position in a proper manner.

      If you can’t express it properly, there’s a good indication you don’t understand it properly.

      • bjedwards says:

        You stuck your foot in your mouth, suyts. Show me where you have refuted the fact that the overwhelming science demonstrates AGW is real?

        Cat still got your tongue? Or is the reality of that fact so stark that you already know admitting it demolishes your house of cards?

        I neither have to defend the science nor refute you. I have stated a simple fact that the overwhelming science demonstrates AGW is real. That’s where the science is. Now you blather on that it’s all a hoax but you cannot articulate why or how the science is a hoax. Goddard is no different, caught in the same trap of his own making, unable to give any explanation why he misrepresents climate science and unable to demonstrate any “hoax” or how one could possibly work.

        So, try again, suyts. Answer the question and quit evading it.

      • suyts says:

        Gee BJ, you still haven’t replied to the decrease in the rate of sea-level rise. Once you do, we can go from there.

      • suyts says:

        bj, you may be under a misconception about my views. I don’t attempt to refute AGW. Although, I believe they miss the mark by several fold.

        I refute CAGW.

  16. bjedwards says:

    My question in my first comment remains on the table. Goddard et al still won’t answer it.

  17. Justa Joe says:

    BJ, When did you stop beating your boyfriend?

  18. Geez says:

    At last a scientist (Prof Courtillot) with class and knowledge. If only Hansen et al could bring themselves up to the same level?! We might have meaningful debate rather than scandalous, offensive garbage perpetrated against people who do not believe in their AGW religion.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s