Kathy Castor, House Climate Chair, wants to suppress "harmful misinformation"

[Daeva]

'"Totalitarian': House climate chair slammed for urging Google to squelch 'climate misinformation'"

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/jan/29/kathy-castor-house-climate-chair-slammed-urging-go/

""
???????

Let's get this straight: a sitting government official (lead of a House of Representatives committee!!!) is seeking to influence a private company's policy on how to handle their clientele based on whether the products made by said clientele are in line with the official's political agenda.

Nothing says "I am confident in my position" than trying to silence those who oppose you. But make no mistake, this has very little to do with the climate or with science. Say no to censorship.

[Animal]

Over the years I've received many articles which were referred to people I know by scientists and physicists in top positions. These articles demonstrated that the "majority of scientists" did not agree that climate change or 'global warming' as it used to be called - was manmade. There was also a study demonstrating that scientists were bribed or threatened into silence, agreeing, etc - but I will have to do some digging to find all of this.

I still have many links to such articles which now are just not showing up. (Gee I wonder why.) But I will post whatever I can find, either from my archives or from finding it anew. Note that google works to take these things off the search engines, so any dissent against the horde may be difficult to dig up.

Here are some I was able to find.

https://notrickszone.com/2017/05/29/....Rl0RByCs.dpbs

https://notrickszone.com/global-warming-disputed-300-graphs/

-----

Here are some articles talking about the above two graphs, with additional links in them:

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archiv...limatistas.php

https://notrickszone.com/2017/05/29/...eo69o.28012PAP

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archiv...tm_campaign=sw

-----

You can search "global warming" on this page and find some scandals on its behalf, listed among countless others:

https://lists.grabien.com/list-compl...tdirection=asc

----

This article is called "Democrats lose argument, try to burn books"

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archiv...burn-books.php

This is the longer article it's referring to, with many links included:

https://dailycaller.com/2017/04/04/h...#ixzz4dJne3Xo2

This is the most important part:

The Democrats were responding to a campaign by the conservative Heartland Institute copies of all issued a statement telling teachers to trash the book.

___

Some people also believe for various reasons that the "climate crisis" being pushed by the democrats is not actually about the environment, because they deflect viable solutions which fail to give them more power. I could easily find more evidence of this line of thought among high end people who know the ins and outs of the climate argument, as I've seen it in many places over the years, but this is the one that currently popped up in my inbox.

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archiv...e-activism.php

---

Please note that I am not a scientist, and I am not personally arguing for or against climate change, nor that it is or isn't man-made.

Before anyone argues with me, let me repeat.

I am not a scientist, and I am not personally arguing for or against climate change, nor that it is or isn't man-made.


My argument is: there are scientists by the many who disagree with the science that Democrats are pretending is "unanimously" agreed upon by scientists. Many scientists were prohibited from having their work published because it disagreed with their hoax. I call it a hoax because their claims require suppressing the opinions of people in the field who disagree with them, while pretending there is unanimous agreement. As a non-scientist I will not pretend that I know the truth about global warming, climate change, or any other title they choose to give this phenomenon. I DO NOT KNOW AND YOU DON'T EITHER. What I do know is that many scientists who showed strong dissent were not counted in the "All scientists agree" argument which is False, and which involved hiding emails, hiding research, and other oppression.

I will do my best to present more evidence because I have read TONS of it over the years. But the recent attempt to stop any dissenting scientists and physicists from presenting their case on youtube, should be enough evidence that the claim "all scientists agree" is a hoax.

[Animal]

Now, I will be EXCESSIVELY clear, at the risk of being misinterpreted.

I am not that familiar with Trump's stance on climate change. I've heard two things thrown around on facebook: "Trump is ignoring the climate" (coming from the left) and the phrase "climate change hoax" coming from the right. But I have not pursued this line of thought because I am not a scientist. I have focused on issues that make more sense to me based on my experience, such as healthcare, and left science to the scientists and science-minded folks. But these are my thoughts. MY THOUGHTS. Not "fox news," not "Trump," not this or that. Please spare me the accusations. I actually have a brain and I use it to think, so anyone who says I'm spouting fox news, which I don't watch, is simply revealing their own mindset, which is that no one can possibly think for themselves. By claiming such bullshit about me, you reveal yourself as a brainwashed mimic repeating other people's words. Believe it or not, there are people who think for themselves.

My personal opinion:

- The climate matters. If there is a way to save it FOR REAL (like dealing with plastic trash island), that is paramount. The science behind long term climate change should be investigated honestly, rather than just by the scientists that agree with a monolithic political agenda.

- Science should be for scientists and politics should be for politicians. If there is an ongoing debate among scientists about the climate, the government has no right making laws or collecting money on behalf of a "unanimous agreement" that doesn't exist. Nor do they have a right to silence dissent. This is a direct violation of the first amendment.

- The fact that citizens would be charged taxes for carbon emissions , and that certain bigshots like Al Gore would benefit financially from pushing this agenda, tells me that it's a hoax, not to be trusted as "fact" or "science." This does not preclude the possibility that they are right and that climate change is manmade. But if the solution is for them to destroy the economy and collect more money based on arbitrary and capricious laws whose effectiveness is backed only by SOME scientists and not others, I'm not ok with that.

- The government and media, until recently, mostly ignored plastic trash. This is a definite, visible, obvious problem with the climate and the environment, that is 100% man made and real, and non-negotiable. It is right there, before our eyes. The cause is plastic which is made by humans. So, why don't the media and government focus attention on THAT more immediately? Oh, right - because doing so would not result in them pocketing more of our money and controlling everything we do. Seeking solutions for this would be paramount if I were president, personally.

- The reason I personally call the climate change panic a "hoax" is because the Democrats are claiming unanimous agreement among scientists while silencing the dissent, which is a dishonest, fraudulent stance and a misuse of their power. I don't know what Trump's view is, but my guess is that "climate change hoax" is a Trump-phrase. I am not sure if he's referring to the (plausible) reality of climate change or if he's referring to the Democrats silencing the dissent and claiming unanimous agreement. I would advise anyone that thinks they know what he means, to find him talking about it in context rather than in out-of-context clips on CNN. But either way, his view, whatever it is - has nothing to do with mine. If he and I happen to agree, that is because we may have similar ideas on this issue. Not because I'm defending or echoing HIM by sharing observations of my own.

[SpiritoftheGael]

Animal this is the last thing Trump had to say about it as far as I am aware if you want to know:
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-en...climate-change

[Animal]

Thank you ! I will look

[Daeva]

This video sums it up perfectly, IMO:

"Scenario #4 | Real Climate Science" by Suspicious0bservers

For those interested in this topic, I strongly suggest watching this 11 min video.