Jailed for scientific dissent?! 20 climate scientists call for RICO investigation of climate skeptics

Scared Straight?Scared Straight?Top UN scientist Dr. Kevin Trenberth and 19 other scientists have become so tired of debating global warming that they are now apparently seeking to jail those who disagree with them.

Warmist scientists including UN IPCC Lead Author Kevin Trenberth to Obama: ‘We appreciate that you are making aggressive and imaginative use of the limited tools available to you in the face of a recalcitrant Congress. One additional tool – recently proposed by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse – is a RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) investigation of corporations and other organizations that have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change, as a means to forestall America’s response to climate change. We strongly endorse Senator Whitehouse’s call for a RICO investigation.’

Via Politico: ‘Twenty climate scientists called for RICO investigation in a letter to Obama and U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch. The scientists argue that the systemic efforts to prevent the public from understanding climate change resembles the investigation undertaken against tobacco. They draw inspiration from Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse who said on the Senate floor that there might be a similar conspiracy here, and a civil trial could provide the tools of discovery needed to find out.’

Letter reproduced in full:

Letter to President Obama, Attorney General Lynch, and OSTP Director Holdren

September 1, 2015

Dear President Obama, Attorney General Lynch, and OSTP Director Holdren,

As you know, an overwhelming majority of climate scientists are convinced about the potentially serious adverse effects of human-induced climate change on human health, agriculture, and biodiversity. We applaud your efforts to regulate emissions and the other steps you are taking. Nonetheless, as climate scientists we are exceedingly concerned that America’s response to climate change – indeed, the world’s response to climate change – is insufficient. The risks posed by climate change, including increasing extreme weather events, rising sea levels, and increasing ocean acidity – and potential strategies for addressing them – are detailed in the Third National Climate Assessment (2014), Climate Change Impacts in the United States. The stability of the Earth’s climate over the past ten thousand years contributed to the growth of agriculture and therefore, a thriving human civilization. We are now at high risk of seriously destabilizing the Earth’s climate and irreparably harming people around the world, especially the world’s poorest people.

We appreciate that you are making aggressive and imaginative use of the limited tools available to you in the face of a recalcitrant Congress. One additional tool – recently proposed by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse – is a RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) investigation of corporations and other organizations that have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change, as a means to forestall America’s response to climate change. The actions of these organizations have been extensively documented in peerreviewed academic research (Brulle, 2013) and in recent books including: Doubt is their Product (Michaels, 2008), Climate Cover-Up (Hoggan & Littlemore, 2009), Merchants of Doubt (Oreskes & Conway, 2010), The Climate War (Pooley, 2010), and in The Climate Deception Dossiers (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2015). We strongly endorse Senator Whitehouse’s call for a RICO investigation.

The methods of these organizations are quite similar to those used earlier by the tobacco industry. A RICO investigation (1999 to 2006) played an important role in stopping the tobacco industry from continuing to deceive the American people about the dangers of smoking. If corporations in the fossil fuel industry and their supporters are guilty of the misdeeds that have been documented in books and journal articles, it is imperative that these misdeeds be stopped as soon as possible so that America and the world can get on with the critically important business of finding effective ways to restabilize the Earth’s climate, before even more lasting damage is done.

Sincerely,

Jagadish Shukla, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA

Edward Maibach, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA

Paul Dirmeyer, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA

Barry Klinger, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA

Paul Schopf, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA

David Straus, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA

Edward Sarachik, University of Washington, Seattle, WA

Michael Wallace, University of Washington, Seattle, WA

Alan Robock, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ

Eugenia Kalnay, University of Maryland, College Park, MD

William Lau, University of Maryland, College Park, MD

Kevin Trenberth, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO T.N.

Krishnamurti, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL

Vasu Misra, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL

Ben Kirtman, University of Miami, Miami, FL

Robert Dickinson, University of Texas, Austin, TX

Michela Biasutti, Earth Institute, Columbia University, New York, NY

Mark Cane, Columbia University, New York, NY

Lisa Goddard, Earth Institute, Columbia University, New York, NY

Alan Betts, Atmospheric Research, Pittsford, VT

#

End letter

#

Source

Trackback from your site.

Leave a comment (newest first):

Comments (20)

  • Avatar

    JayPee

    |

    The willful silencing of skepticism, dissent and continuing logical inquiry in regard to theoretical formulation

    IS NOT SCIENCE

    but its diametric opposite.

    The signatories of this screed have exposed what they are.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Me

    |

    The tools of discovery needed to find out works both ways as they have already seen. So buy shares in popcorn, this could be a long one! 🙄

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Al Shelton

    |

    Isn’t it unbelievable that the very thing that these AGW Alarmists are doing is totally anti-science.
    What nerve, audacity and arrogance of these people.
    Keep the list.
    They are the ones that should be charged. They have been obtaining taxpayers funds by fraudulent means. Where is the proof that CO2 is causing global warming, hence climate change?

    Reply

  • Avatar

    GR82DRV

    |

    [img]http://static.fjcdn.com/comments/5311358+_8cbc32e6626982ce73a0291054052876.jpg[/img]

    Reply

  • Avatar

    amirlach

    |

    This is pure projection on the part of alarmists. They see their own guilt reflected in every shinny surface they look at.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    GR82DRV

    |

    I really don’t like using the term, but sometimes it’s appropriate:

    [b]Intellectual Nazism[/b]

    When you can no longer manage a debate, arrest those with whom you disagree. These people disgust me. They dishonor their country, and they [u]dishonor science[/u].

    Reply

  • Avatar

    kevin

    |

    I didn’t know we had a stable climate over the past 10,000 years – what a crock.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Michael Rath

    |

    OK, let’s put it this way. If they are stupid enough to get a RICO investigation, and are found innocent, then those 2o scientists go to prison until the ice melts!

    Reply

  • Avatar

    GR82DRV

    |

    Let’s see…

    Phony carbon credit schemes created by Al Gore and his insider friends that use extortion to bilk cash from struggling businesses.

    An entire alternative energy industry predicated on man made climate change, that has devolved into a massive sinkhole for crony capital sweetheart grant awards of billions in taxpayer dollars – often producing nothing of value, while enriching the politically connected few.

    Diversion of billions of taxpayer dollars into politically predetermined “scientific” outcomes, essentially diverting public scientific funding into selected political causes.

    Many proven cases of altered climate data and study designs to achieve results desired by political funding groups using public funds.

    Threats to restrict First Amendment free speech rights of alternative scientific views by intimidation, deprivation of study funding, loss of employment, and now arrest.

    And the people supporting this [b]organized crime[/b] want to prosecute those who would oppose it with the RICO act?

    That’s rich.

    Reply

    • Avatar

      Me

      |

      Yep, and don’t forget re-education camps and drug treatments to fix the skeptics because we don’t trust the BS story they are pushing.

      Reply

  • Avatar

    Amber

    |

    Insider trading allegations were never proven against Whitehouse and it is interesting that 30% of the 20 signatures on the letter came from just one university . Virginia’s, George Mason University which sits down the list at about 60’th in size in the USA had six signatures.
    They are slightly out signed by over 9000 scientists with PHD’s that signed the Oregon Petition encouraging the USA government to stop hyperventilating over scary global warming.
    Given the rather large contribution of signatures from one of the smaller universities in the USA perhaps they should be honored by naming their letter the George Mason Silence Project . Obviously none of the signatory use fossil fuels and their classes are heat and light free .

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Amber

    |

    The best possible thing would be for this nonsense to get put before a Court. Right now they can just say any alarmist thing they want and most of the media are to ignorant and brain washed to even ask decent questions . Are they to be silenced too ?
    Did Whitehouse even take science 12 ?

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Old Salt Hogan

    |

    [b]Wouldn’t Senator McCarthy have had a good time?[/b]

    Reply

  • Avatar

    E.PatrickMosman

    |

    “Kevin Trenberth a government employee wrote in one of the Climategate emails: “The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.” and now he is one of the 20 asking the the President and the Justice Department to begin a RICO investigation into those who agree with his “travesty” conclusion. “As you know, an overwhelming majority of climate scientists are convinced about the potentially serious adverse effects of human-induced climate change on human health, agriculture, and biodiversity” . How many of these “climate scientists” receive US government grants since”He who pays the piper calls the tune”?

    Reply

  • Avatar

    GR82DRV

    |

    I’m gonna go out on a limb here and speculate that nearly all of those letter signers are on the extreme left end of the political spectrum. After all, insulated tenure at our universities breeds leftism, partly because these people can exempt themselves from the effects of the Marxist policies they would prescribe for the rest of us.

    Interesting that the list of prescriptions for climate change have almost nothing to do with science, but instead read [i]exactly[/i] like the 100 year wish list of world the socialist/Marxist movement.

    Coincidence?…

    Reply

    • Avatar

      Me

      |

      I’d say you are correct thar Sir!

      Reply

  • Avatar

    E.PatrickMosman

    |

    “The actions of these organizations have been extensively documented in peer reviewed academic research” If reviewers can’t judge the factual accuracy, reliability and reproducibility of the data how can they verify the results. The Climategate email and files confirmed that they(Climategate Cabal) not only controlled the papers that would be considered by the IPCC committees, but also, controlled which peer reviewed papers would be published in scientific publications to the point that they were able to have an editor fired for publishing paper that challenged the AGW consensus. Another example, the Wegman Commission’s, appointed by Congress, report on the Mann “hockey stick” curve concluded, “in our further exploration of the social network of authorships in temperature reconstruction, “we found that at least 43 authors have direct ties to Dr. Mann by virtue of coauthored papers with him. Our findings from this analysis suggest that authors in the area of paleoclimate studies are closely connected and thus ‘independent studies’ may not be as independent as they might appear on the surface.” This is the definition of what a peer review process should not be, an old boy network providing scientific cover for work of one of their own that they could not verify or duplicate as the author(s) refuse to provide the information needed for a valid peer review.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Amber

    |

    Climategate made it perfectly clear that a little clique of climate modellers and self professed experts worked diligently to cover each others backs.The famous quote from Trenberth (travesty they can’t account for the lack of warming )
    reflects disappointment that comes from a failed hypothesis .

    One would think that if you confirmed that the earth has a fever hypothesis failed there would be a certain degree of joy instead of characterising it as a travesty .

    No, the travesty is there are people who claim to be scientists that can’t handle the possibility that the product they are trying to promote doesn’t have scientific support .
    It has been well and truly demonstrated most climate model predictions are a joke .

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Amber

    |

    What is the penalty to politicians that use advance, confidential, commercial information to short sell stocks or unload positions ?

    Reply

Leave a comment

Loading Disqus Comments ...

No Trackbacks.