Professor Wants Climate Change "Deniers" Thrown in Jail
By Michael Schaus
TownHall.com
An assistant philosophy professor at Rochester
Institute of Technology has proposed a bold plan to
settle the debate on Global Warming.
Lawrence Torcello wrote an essay suggesting that
scientists who fail to fall in line with global
warming alarmists should be charged with criminal
negligence, and possibly even be thrown in jail.
Nothing screams academic freedom like a little
intellectual Fascism. Right?
When it comes to global warming, much of the public
remains in denial about a set of facts that the
majority of scientists clearly agree on.
Well, Larry (can we call him Larry?), it might
surprise you – an assistant professor of philosophy
– to learn that science is not a democratic study.
Skepticism, opposition, and deviation from the
adopted narrative are more responsible for
scientific discovery than blind allegiance to any
prevailing theory. And, quite frankly, the theory of
anthropogenic global warming has been delegitimized
by some of its greatest proponents… Most scientists
would agree that it becomes increasingly difficult
to believe in a theory that has routinely failed to
produce any moderately accurate models or
predictions. But, of course it gets better:
With such high stakes, an organized campaign funding
misinformation ought to be considered criminally
negligent.
Laughably, Larry is not talking about
East Anglia, Al Gore, or the UN Climate Change
Scandal (where a number of scientists were quoted
out of context to give the impression of a consensus
view on climate change). In fact, while Larry
alleges that “deniers” (apparently the word
“skeptic” doesn’t have the right amount of stigma
attached to it) are engaged in a misinformation
campaign, he never once defends the propagandistic
efforts of the global-warming-faithful.
Governments, activist groups, well connected CEOs,
and elite billionaire Liberals have pushed trillions
of dollars into the propagation of global warming
fears. And yet, strangely, this assistant philosophy
professor seems incapable unwilling to see the irony
of his allegations. But, wait… He soon goes for the
jugular:
We have good reason to consider the funding of
climate denial to be criminally and morally
negligent. The charge of criminal and moral
negligence ought to extend to all activities of the
climate deniers who receive funding as part of a
sustained campaign to undermine the public’s
understanding of scientific consensus.
Ah… So scientists who dare to question the provably
wrong predictions of melted ice caps, winterless
years, and raising sea levels should be charged with
negligence for “undermining the public’s
understanding of scientific consensus”? Well, here’s
some scientific consensus for you, Larry:
The world has not seen a measurable increase in
temperatures for over 15 years. Arctic ice has
increased in mass since 2013. The “Polar Vortex” is
part of a broader, and predictable, weather shift
that has been happening for thousands of years.
“Climate Change” has been occurring, without
man-made forces, for every single one of the
billions of years this rock has been spinning around
the sun.
But, let’s be honest: Larry isn’t really worried
about the science (even though I’m sure his studies
in philosophy have yielded him great insights into
climatology, atmospheric science, and meteorological
changes throughout history). He’s worried about
opposition to his beliefs. He even acknowledges some
of the pushback that his idea might receive:
My argument probably raises an understandable, if
misguided, concern regarding free speech.
Misguided? The Left’s intolerance, it seems, has no
bounds.
A student from Harvard recently argued against
academic freedom. Not wanting to be outdone,
this assistant professor is now suggesting that
political opponents (or for that matter, scientists
who don’t tow his ideological ideals) be criminally
charged. It is almost stunning how easily the Left
will adopt the notion of censorship and intellectual
fascism to limit their opposition.
For being an assistant professor of philosophy,
Torcello seems stunningly married to an egocentric
world view. People who disagree with him, in his
mind, are not merely “wrong”… They’re crossing the
threshold into criminality. This is a point of view
that is growing among the Left. Opponents to the
President are racist. Opponents of Nancy Pelosi are
sexist. Advocates for traditional marriage are
bigots. And, apparently, opponents to the theory of
anthropogenic global warming are worthy of a little
jail time. This doesn’t seem like positions that
lend themselves to any degree of philosophical
integrity.
If Larry really wants to help fight global warming,
he should keep his totalitarian mouth shut…
Currently, he’s spewing too much hot air into the
atmosphere.