The Global Warming Thought Police Want Skeptics In ‘Jail’

Conform or else. That’s the message of the global warming alarmists. Those who don’t buy into the man-made climate change narrative should be prosecuted as criminals.

“Put officials who reject science in jail,” someone named Brad Johnson who says he’s executive director of something called Climate Hawks Vote tweeted last month.

At roughly the same time, Mark Hertsgaard typed a screed in The Nation which ran under the headline:

“Climate Denialism Is Literally Killing Us: The victims of Hurricane Harvey have a murderer — and it’s not the storm. ”

“How long,” Hertsgaard asked, “before we hold the ultimate authors of such climate catastrophes accountable for the miseries they inflict?”

And then there’s Bill Nye, the Junk Science Guy, who hasn’t been able to cover up his apparent desire to see “criminal investigations” against those ignoring his truth. It’s not hard to see through him, though. He dissembles like a politician but his appetite is clear.

The urge to prosecute and imprison those who don’t believe as they have been commanded to is not a new wrinkle among the alarmist tribe. Three years ago, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., sounding like, well, a Kennedy, said the Koch brothers “should be in jail, I think they should be enjoying three hots and a cot at The Hague with all the other war criminals.”

“Do I think the Koch brothers should be tried for reckless endangerment? Absolutely, that is a criminal offense and they ought to be serving time for it.”

The Kochs’ crime? Selling energy resources to willing buyers and funding organizations that have reservations about the climate change story we’re constantly being told.

Of course, Kennedy’s wild man rant isn’t new either. The history of mankind is marked with incidents of one group forcing its beliefs on another at the point of the sword — and more lately at the strike of a U.S. passenger jet.

Kennedy, Johnson, Hertsgaard, and others probably don’t see themselves as runaway zealots. But what zealot has ever recognized his or her own fanaticism?

Maybe the worst case of zealotry from one who refuses to see his own intolerance is British funnyman Eric Idle, who tweeted earlier this year that the skeptics who hold their position due to “stupidity and ignorance” should be punished “humanely. Put down gently.” Idle, we can’t forget, was part of Monty Python’s Flying Circus, which was responsible the famous line: “No one expects the Spanish Inquisition.”

Sadly, that line just isn’t as funny anymore. All the air went out of it when one of the team members who co-wrote and acted in the skit decided to support a modern inquisition led by climate radicals. We should have seen it coming.

Read more at IBD

Comments (4)

  • Avatar

    Spurwing Plover


    Just imagine going to jail just for being a skeptic and like Hollywood show off Leonardo DiCaprio claiming that to reject Global Warming is rejecting the truth and coming from some person who’s carrier is playing the parts of ficional persons in movies their own version of Lets Pretend Bill Nye the Mad Scientists Guy his little spoiled brattiness Robert Kennedy Jr and his idiot group Water keeper’s Alliance Al Bore and his undeserved awards John Kerry and his dangerous Air Conditoners kind of reminds me of Rosie ODonnel and her stance against gun owners and wanting them sent to jail while hiring a armed goon to protect her adopted child Their Hypocricy and Arrogance is deafening

  • Avatar



    I wouldn’t be surprised to hear that Britain has a “society” of some sort that cares for geriatric pythons. They had a long successful career mocking ineptitude. You’d think a Python would avoid a role in a real life farce.
    Oops, I just remembered…. Yellow Beard and Jaborwocky.

  • Avatar



    So being in “denial” of the utterly invalidated Mann Made Global Warming hypothesis rates jail?

    ““Climate Denialism Is Literally Killing Us: The victims of Hurricane Harvey have a murderer — and it’s not the storm. ”

    No! The real denialism is in thinking that the failed hypothesis and the invalidated models and “science” they are based upon are in any way a valid legal argument.

    “How long,” Hertsgaard asked, “before we hold the ultimate authors of such climate catastrophes accountable for the miseries they inflict?”

    How long before the ultimate authors of the such catastrophic, model based predictive, scientific failures are held accountable for the economic and social miseries they are inflicting?

    The leftarded all suffer from severe Projection. Take the democrats and their Russian collusion narrative. They “investigate” Trump for some imagined collusion with Russia while the Clinton’s were raking in rubles for selling out the USA on the Uranium One deal?

    Does anyone with a functioning frontal lobe actually believe this crap?

    • Avatar

      David Lewis


      There are true crimes being committed, like fraudulently changing data to support the AGW movement while on the federal payroll. Using government recourses for political campaigns is also a crime and has been common with NOAA’s “worst ever” announcements. Many should be prosecuted but it doesn’t appear Trump is interested.

      I have noticed over the decades that liberals think that rights such as freedom of speech should only apply to them and never to those who oppose them.

Comments are closed