The thought police have arrived...

Disparaging his first nation heritage with the pejorative and hurtful name of "Tonto" is similar to calling a black person the n-word, and should be subject to severe sanctions from this well managed SHMB. Originally Posted by DSK

That's true, but it's LittleLiberalEva. He doesn't know any better. He can't answer simple questions, he is incapable of original thought, so it's only natural that he's a racist, as well. I don't hold it against him. The air gets mighty thin in those Kansas mountains!

Hahaha... pushing your buttons now, fido?

I showed enough curiosity to ask you to post a link... you're the one who is too fucking lazy to do this or even put a lick of effort into supporting your "position" (if you have one, other than that Exxon-Mobil is guilty of something).

Are you skeered I might nit-pick you, fido the troll? Originally Posted by lustylad

He's a passive/aggressive libtard. He thanks you when you correct him. Then he try's to get smart. Whereas Asswipe is a full blown asshole pig. Doesn't even try to fake intelligence. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA OINK

Are you skeered I might nit-pick you, fido the troll? Originally Posted by lustylad

Thanks for the last debate, because it taught me your accusations and insults are pretty much always projection. I'll be smart enough to avoid your troll, this time at least.

Thanks for the last debate, because it taught me your accusations and insults are pretty much always projection. I'll be smart enough to avoid your troll, this time at least. Originally Posted by eatfibo

What debate? We never had one because you chickened out, just like you're doing now. I invited you at least a half dozen times to explain "AGW" in a substantive way, and you wimped out each and every time! Even after I buttered you up by calling you the smartest AGW guy in the room. Your last excuse for ducking any real discussion was classic. In fact it was so good it deserves a repost:

I've been in these debates enough times to know that if I throw some evidence forward, someone is just going to nit-pick it. Which will require me to go into more detail. Which will just get nit-picked. Which will require me to describe another confirming phenomenon. However, instead of accepting that these two phenomenon both point strongly to the same thing, they will nit-pick the next phenomenon. Which will require me to go into more explanation of that second phenomenon, which will be nit-picked. Next thing you know, I've written pages and pages supporting the theory of AGW that people won't accept because they were able to nit-pick my non-expert descriptions of each individual thing. So you want me to re-write what has already been written in a way that will not be as correct or as convincing as actual experts on the topic. Originally Posted by eatfibo

Hahahaha.... and you're the guy who was touting “peer-reviewed” studies and boasting about your superior knowledge of scientific methods! Now that's rich! If scientists everywhere shared your yellow-bellied wussiness, we'd still be back in the Dark Ages! How the fuck do you think science advances? By not being afraid to put it out there and let everyone nit-pick each others' ideas, that's how!

Poor widdle fido! Afwaid to be nit-picked!

You're nothing but a troll, fido. You never debate - you just duck, dodge, deflect, evade and run around in circles. Here you go again in this thread – you talk about some unnamed Exxon-Mobil lawsuit and you won't even get specific or post a link so people can engage in intelligent discussion.

Speaking of nit-picking, tell us again - what's the difference between decimate and destroy?

That's true, but it's LittleLiberalEva. He doesn't know any better. He can't answer simple questions, he is incapable of original thought, so it's only natural that he's a racist, as well. I don't hold it against him. The air gets mighty thin in those Kansas mountains! Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Has a 10 year old hacked your account Tonto? Did you lose sight of the Op? If you were as smart as you claim, then all these stupid questions would not be necessary. Originally Posted by i'va biggen

Worth repeating as Tonto won't answer questions either.

Poor LittleLiberalEva. Imagine having to go through life like that. Sad. Funny, but sad.

Good for you. It doesn't change the fact that, if they did this, what they did was illegal.
Originally Posted by eatfibo

The complainant has no standing to bully Exxon Mobil without a legitimate injury to the investors - who don't appear to be complaining and would actually see an adverse effect on their stockholdings if the AG prevails - in which case it could be asserted that the AG's efforts hurts the very stockholders they claim to represent.

But the reality is that Exxon is currently under criminal fraud investigation... the fact that they have issued a subpoena... is nothing out of the ordinary and is almost certainly not an attack on free speech. The people who believe this are just doing so because they were told to do so. Originally Posted by eatfibo

Yeah right, fido... don't play us for stupid. You're the one who is doing what you are told to do by the "experts" you defer to but can't expound on.

Read this - then tell us again how much you libtards respect the First Amendment. You and your ilk would have burned Galileo at the stake 380 years ago! Galileo was a nit-picker!


Punishing Climate-Change Skeptics

Some in Washington want to unleash government to harass heretics who don’t accept the ‘consensus.’

By David B. Rivkin Jr. and Andrew M. Grossman

March 23, 2016 6:29 p.m. ET

Galileo Galilei was tried in 1633 for spreading the heretical view that the Earth orbits the sun, convicted by the Roman Catholic Inquisition, and remained under house arrest until his death. Today’s inquisitors seek their quarry’s imprisonment and financial ruin. As the scientific case for a climate-change catastrophe wanes, proponents of big-ticket climate policies are increasingly focused on punishing dissent from an asserted “consensus” view that the only way to address global warming is to restructure society—how it harnesses and uses energy. That we might muddle through a couple degrees’ of global warming over decades or even centuries, without any major disruption, is the new heresy and must be suppressed.

The Climate Inquisition began with Michael Mann’s 2012 lawsuit against critics of his “hockey stick” research—a holy text to climate alarmists. The suggestion that Prof. Mann’s famous diagram showing rapid recent warming was an artifact of his statistical methods, rather than an accurate representation of historical reality, was too much for the Penn State climatologist and his acolytes to bear.

Among their targets (and our client in his lawsuit) was the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a think tank prominent for its skeptical viewpoint in climate-policy debates. Mr. Mann’s lawsuit seeks to put it, along with National Review magazine, out of business. Four years on, the courts are still pondering the First Amendment values at stake. In the meantime, the lawsuit has had its intended effect, fostering legal uncertainty that chills speech challenging the “consensus” view.

Mr. Mann’s lawsuit divided climate scientists—many of whom recognized that it threatened vital scientific debate—but the climate Inquisition was only getting started. The past year has witnessed even more heavy-handed attempts to enforce alarmist doctrine and stamp out dissent.

Assuming the mantle of Grand Inquisitor is Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D., R.I.). Last spring he called on the Justice Department to bring charges against those behind a “coordinated strategy” to spread heterodox views on global warming, including the energy industry, trade associations, “conservative policy institutes” and scientists. Mr. Whitehouse, a former prosecutor, identified as a legal basis for charges that the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO, the federal statute enacted to take down mafia organizations and drug cartels.

In September a group of 20 climate scientists wrote to President Obama and Attorney General Loretta Lynch encouraging them to heed Mr. Whitehouse and launch a RICO investigation targeting climate skeptics. This was necessary since, they claimed, America’s policy response to climate change was currently “insufficient,” because of dissenting views regarding the risks of climate change. Email correspondence subsequently obtained through public-records requests revealed that this letter was also coordinated by Mr. Whitehouse.

Reps. Ted Lieu (D., Calif.) and Mark DeSaulnier (D., Calif.) followed up with a formal request for the Justice Department to launch an investigation, specifically targeting Exxon Mobil for its funding of climate research and policy organizations skeptical of extreme warming claims. Attorney General Lynch announced in testimony this month that the matter had been referred to the FBI “to consider whether or not it meets the criteria for what we could take action on.” Similar investigations are already spearheaded by state attorneys general in California and New York.

Meanwhile, Mr. Whitehouse, joined by Sens. Edward Markey (D., Mass.) and Barbara Boxer (D., Calif.), sent letters to a hundred organizations—from private companies to policy institutes—demanding that they turn over information about funding and research relating to climate issues. In his response to the senators, Cato Institute President John Allison called the effort “an obvious attempt to chill research into and funding of public policy projects you don’t like.”

Intimidation is the point of these efforts. Individual scientists, think tanks and private businesses are no match for the vast powers that government officials determined to stifle dissent are able to wield. An onslaught of investigations—with the risk of lawsuits, prosecution and punishment—is more than most can afford to bear. As a practical reality, defending First Amendment rights in these circumstances requires the resources to take on the government and win—no matter the cost or how long it takes.

It also requires taking on the Climate Inquisition directly. Spurious government investigations, driven by the desire to suppress a particular viewpoint, constitute illegal retaliation against protected speech and, as such, can be checked by the courts, with money damages potentially available against the federal and state perpetrators. If anyone is going to be intimidated, it should be officials who are willing to abuse their powers to target speech with which they disagree.

That is why we are establishing the Free Speech in Science Project to defend the kind of open inquiry and debate that are central to scientific advancement and understanding. The project will fund legal advice and defense to those who need it, while executing an offense to turn the tables on abusive officials. Scientists, policy organizations and others should not have to fear that they will be the next victims of the Climate Inquisition—that they may face punishment and personal ruin for engaging in research and advocating their views.

The principle of the First Amendment, the Supreme Court recognized in Dennis v. United States (1951), is that “speech can rebut speech, propaganda will answer propaganda, free debate of ideas will result in the wisest governmental policies.” For that principle to prevail—in something less than the 350 years it took for the Catholic Church to acknowledge its mistake in persecuting Galileo—the inquisition of those breaking from the climate “consensus” must be stopped.

Messrs. Rivkin and Grossman practice appellate and constitutional litigation in Washington, D.C.

So you're a victim now, Junior?

That's true, but it's LittleLiberalEva. He doesn't know any better. He can't answer simple questions, he is incapable of original thought, so it's only natural that he's a racist, as well. I don't hold it against him. The air gets mighty thin in those Kansas mountains! Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Hypocritical mofo.

He's a passive/aggressive libtard. He thanks you when you correct him. Then he try's to get smart. Whereas Asswipe is a full blown asshole pig. Doesn't even try to fake intelligence. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA OINK Originally Posted by bambino

And you're a Lardass who can't get it up except for a man-whore from Bulgaria.

Good for you. It doesn't change the fact that, if they did this, what they did was illegal.


Oh, absolutely. I saw plenty of ridiculousness even with Bush when he was in office. But, I have to say, those who freak out about Obama have brought it to a whole new level. Seriously, look at this thread right here as a perfect example. You've now got multiple people trying to claim that, despite explicitly saying the opposite numerous times, Obama said Al Qaeda is defeated.

People don't care what Obama actually does or says, only what they wish he had done or said. Originally Posted by eatfibo

Have you ever wondered where Al-Qaeda went, and why ISIS is the terrorist group being reported on now?

Jim

The complainant has no standing to bully Exxon Mobil without a legitimate injury to the investors - who don't appear to be complaining Originally Posted by DSK

No, it just usually is the result of loss. However, the crime is lying to people in order to get them to buy your stock.

and would actually see an adverse effect on their stockholdings if the AG prevails - in which case it could be asserted that the AG's efforts hurts the very stockholders they claim to represent.

This argument could be used to stop the AG from prosecuting any crime by any company, unless the company has lost money. You are acting like it isn't a crime unless the price of the stock is already down.

Poor LittleLiberalEva. Imagine having to go through life like that. Sad. Funny, but sad. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Tonto, you are sounding more and more like Trump every day. Are you combing you hair the same also? If they ever make a movie about the dumbing down of Kansas, you will have a starring roll.

Tonto, you are sounding more and more like Trump every day. Are you combing you hair the same also? If they ever make a movie about the dumbing down of Kansas, you will have a starring roll. Originally Posted by i'va biggen

I f they ever make a movie about WELSHING CHIMPS that operate gloryholes and pick dingle berries for a living In KansASS, they YOU will have THE starring role EKIM !