Reddit’s science forum banned climate deniers.

[Spendulus]

Global warming scientists forced to admit defeat... because of too much ice: Stranded Antarctic ship's crew will be rescued by helicopter......

I just wish they will grow a pair when other scientists will make fun of them on their way back home.

Let them walk out, like Shackleford did a century ago, saving his entire crew after the ice crushed his ship.

Shackleton had a lesser carbon footprint that those people for sure

Well, would it be too much to ask for them to get themselves rescued on some kind of carbon neutral thing?  There's just something about that fossil fuel burning rescue chopper that does not seem right.

I wanna see them do it with sails or burning wood.

Seriously.

That damn preaching can come after they earn the right to do some preaching by way of their own behavior.

[U1TRA_L0RD]

So they are banning people who disagree about that humans are creating climate changes?

[AnonyMint]

Note that this actually has nothing to do with whether some aspects are 'true or false' and certainly does not argue against teaching the known effects of co2 concentration in an planetary atmosphere, as long as the limitations of the experiments are well understood.

But there is a lot of science that is done which is mostly ignored because it just isn't that important or relevant.

As I said, once the funding for this religion dries up, these climatologists will be back to mostly talking to themselves in a mirror.

[Spendulus]

So they are banning people who disagree about that humans are creating climate changes?

That is easily definable.  To post on Reddit you preface your comments with an oath of allegiance to a creed of Warmers (we all know that Man's CO2 pollution has set the planet on a thousand year warming, which only urgent action now can abate), then periodically interject into your posts affirmations of the belief structure.  This is fairly easy to do.  You can randomly use the following.

Urgent action is needed now.
<anything with the Koch brothers>
<anything with the word Exxon>
the Earth has a fever
People must change
the poor cuddly polar bears
the hurricanes will be more severe
massive deaths through climate induced migration
the islands will be drowned
the melting icecaps
we killed the coral reefs
the cathrate guns

Suggest sparing use of phrases such as "Hang the deniers from the highest tree" for maximum effectiveness.  Interject as alternates, hints about the greater earth-friendliness of Vegan Beer, whenever people are drinking beer.

In fact, it may be our duty to develop a Survival Guide For the New Gestapo Reddit Climate Forum, in which anyone can wink-wink get by without their words being sent to the eternal damnation.  A mockery of their very religion by some appearing even more vigilantly vigilant, is what is called for.  If someone dares to suggest the planet will heat up by 3C, shrilly denounce him as a Denier and call to the multitude that verily, unless they repent now, 12-15C will be the fever set up on the earth, but close the jeremiah with a call for salvation, and redemption, for the few that hear the Word.

[Wilikon]

So they are banning people who disagree about that humans are creating climate changes?

They are banning anyone who do not agree with them exactly to their exact theory. So you could agree there are some real impact on nature from mankind but then you add ''Maybe not just humans, some other variables could...'' BOOM! You are out!

Science has been settled by real scientists....

[Spendulus]

So they are banning people who disagree about that humans are creating climate changes?

They are banning anyone who do not agree with them exactly to their exact theory. So you could agree there are some real impact on nature from mankind but then you add ''Maybe not just humans, some other variables could...'' BOOM! You are out!

Science has been settled by real scientists....

So if we go over there and act like crazier than shit warmers, like triple every warmer warming number they got they are gonna kick us out?

I mean, that's plain stupid.

I mean, we could be like to warmers what cheech and chong were to dope smokers.  Like, you know, start a fund to send carbon neutral equipment down to those good folks stranded at the South Pole.

Bicycles.  

Here's the party.

http://www.reddit.com/r/climate/

[U1TRA_L0RD]

I believe that is violation of Reddits policies and they can be banned, I will have to talk to one of the main guys there.

[Wilikon]

I believe that is violation of Reddits policies and they can be banned, I will have to talk to one of the main guys there.

I am against banning banning. If this is what they believe is right let them. This is a petty fight As long as they don't (that is the next step, rewind to my other posts) try to have their cancerous radioactive warming breath keeping others on other platform to express themselves; and THAT is their ultimate goal: to go beyond REDDIT and shut anyone with a different viewpoint.

Yes, no one likes trolls. I even troll my own thread from time to time thinking I am a comedian. But pretending every scientists who do not believe their dogma should be banned is... not logical. Some very famous Nobel dude was like "err.. Nah! We need more proof!" And even him got the "He is senile! He doesn't know what he is talking about" treatment.

That was not fair.

[U1TRA_L0RD]

I believe that is violation of Reddits policies and they can be banned, I will have to talk to one of the main guys there.

I am against banning banning. If this is what they believe is right let them. This is a petty fight As long as they don't (that is the next step, rewind to my other posts) try to have their cancerous radioactive warming breath keeping others on other platform to express themselves; and THAT is their ultimate goal: to go beyond REDDIT and shut anyone with a different viewpoint.

Yes, no one likes trolls. I even troll my own thread from time to time thinking I am a comedian. But pretending every scientists who do not believe their dogma should be banned is... not logical. Some very famous Nobel dude was like "err.. Nah! We need more proof!" And even him got the "He is senile! He doesn't know what he is talking about" treatment.

That was not fair.

Yes, but how would users get access back to the forum subs??? It certainly not fair to them. Life is not fair until you make shit happen as my grandfather use to tell me.

[Spendulus]

I believe that is violation of Reddits policies and they can be banned, I will have to talk to one of the main guys there.

I am against banning banning. If this is what they believe is right let them. This is a petty fight As long as they don't (that is the next step, rewind to my other posts) try to have their cancerous radioactive warming breath keeping others on other platform to express themselves; and THAT is their ultimate goal: to go beyond REDDIT and shut anyone with a different viewpoint.

Yes, no one likes trolls. I even troll my own thread from time to time thinking I am a comedian. But pretending every scientists who do not believe their dogma should be banned is... not logical. Some very famous Nobel dude was like "err.. Nah! We need more proof!" And even him got the "He is senile! He doesn't know what he is talking about" treatment.

That was not fair.

Yes, but how would users get access back to the forum subs??? It certainly not fair to them. Life is not fair until you make shit happen as my grandfather use to tell me.

Good question.  So if you repent of your sins and do penance, pledging to never use more than one light bulb for a year, and that only a twisty noodle bulb, recite the pledge, and show that although a sinnner, you yearn for salvation, you can get back in and post from time to time a humble...

Amen.

[u9y42]

As I stated before, I also don't agree that banning people outright for their views is the right choice. That said, the rules over there seem to be very simple: whatever your position on a given subject, be prepared to present peer reviewed sources. That is the position of the mods there and is stated in the rules; it is a science sub after all. No one is going to be banned for that. On the other hand, if all you can do is troll the forum, banning seems like a good enough choice.

[Spendulus]

I believe that is violation of Reddits policies and they can be banned, I will have to talk to one of the main guys there.

I am not sure how it would be figured out that comically personifying ultra-zealot warmers would be trolling and worthy of being banned, because
A)  Anybody that would ban an extreme warmer must be a Denier
B)  there are actually lots of ultra zealot warmers floating around now that the sea level has raised eighty feet
C)  Banners should be banned, if they don't follow proper banning procedure.  The only smart way to do this is to have a High Priest of Reddit Banning, who has a staff and a rod that will comfort you.

Only those infidels marked by His Settled Science shall be banned.

All is well.

[Wilikon]

Miley Cyrus was a baby and Bill Clinton had just been inaugurated the last time this happened: For the first time in 20 years, the USA saw more record cold temperatures than record hot temperatures in 2013, according to statistics from the National Climatic Data Center.

“For the first year since 1993, there were more daily record lows than daily highs that were either tied or set in 2013,” reported Weather Channel meteorologist Guy Walton, who keeps track of the data from the climate center.

Through Dec. 28, there have been 11,852 daily record lows in 2013, compared with 10,073 daily record highs, according to Walton.

A “daily” record occurs when a specific location sets a record high or low temperature for a particular day; other types of records include monthly and all-time.

Walton said that an unusually cold spring was the main factor in the “cool” 2013.


http://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2013/12/31/record-cold-temperatures/4264237/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is settled!

[bonker]

"Climate change" ain't science, it's a part of the globalisation political agenda.

The degenerates at the BBC are always pushing global warming at every opportunity, along with all the other globalist fucknuts

[Jcw188]

Miley Cyrus was a baby and Bill Clinton had just been inaugurated the last time this happened: For the first time in 20 years, the USA saw more record cold temperatures than record hot temperatures in 2013, according to statistics from the National Climatic Data Center.

“For the first year since 1993, there were more daily record lows than daily highs that were either tied or set in 2013,” reported Weather Channel meteorologist Guy Walton, who keeps track of the data from the climate center.

Through Dec. 28, there have been 11,852 daily record lows in 2013, compared with 10,073 daily record highs, according to Walton.

A “daily” record occurs when a specific location sets a record high or low temperature for a particular day; other types of records include monthly and all-time.

Walton said that an unusually cold spring was the main factor in the “cool” 2013.


http://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2013/12/31/record-cold-temperatures/4264237/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is settled!

One year does not a trend make.  Look at the overall evidence.  And then just use common sense.  Humans put so much crap into the environment it MUST be affecting it.

[Wilikon]

Miley Cyrus was a baby and Bill Clinton had just been inaugurated the last time this happened: For the first time in 20 years, the USA saw more record cold temperatures than record hot temperatures in 2013, according to statistics from the National Climatic Data Center.

“For the first year since 1993, there were more daily record lows than daily highs that were either tied or set in 2013,” reported Weather Channel meteorologist Guy Walton, who keeps track of the data from the climate center.

Through Dec. 28, there have been 11,852 daily record lows in 2013, compared with 10,073 daily record highs, according to Walton.

A “daily” record occurs when a specific location sets a record high or low temperature for a particular day; other types of records include monthly and all-time.

Walton said that an unusually cold spring was the main factor in the “cool” 2013.


http://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2013/12/31/record-cold-temperatures/4264237/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is settled!

One year does not a trend make.  Look at the overall evidence.  And then just use common sense.  Humans put so much crap into the environment it MUST be affecting it.

The less humans, the better for Nature. How come those in love with Nature never abort themselves? They love using dirty fueled boats all the way to pristine ice to prove how much they love Nature, dejecting everything they create on board for the good of the fish. Of course they can buy carbon credits to balance their evil deeds for the good cause or something.

[Spendulus]

...on sense.  Humans put so much crap into the environment it MUST be affecting it.

Well.  But look at your own words.  What kind of argument have you made?  Not one that anyone would disagree with.

But not one that is precise enough to have any scientific meaning, either.

Here's some bullshit for you.

"The four dead, drowned polar bears recently found is consistent with the theory that shrinking sea ice caused by global warming is endangering the polar bear environment."

See if you can pick out in this sentence the bullshit.

Where you've been conned and made a dunce.

[Spendulus]

....Of course they can buy carbon credits to balance their evil deeds for the good cause or something.

You know, the really smart way to do that is to buy the carbon credits from yourself.

Wait...

[Wilikon]

....Of course they can buy carbon credits to balance their evil deeds for the good cause or something.

You know, the really smart way to do that is to buy the carbon credits from yourself.

Wait...

Maybe there is a way to link bitcoin miners and carbon credits but I am not smart enough to see how.

[Spendulus]

....Of course they can buy carbon credits to balance their evil deeds for the good cause or something.

You know, the really smart way to do that is to buy the carbon credits from yourself.

Wait...

Maybe there is a way to link bitcoin miners and carbon credits but I am not smart enough to see how.

Okay.  I will help you out with that.  Start with facts, then proceed to develop a logical, testable method.

We know ethanol is a carbon neutral fuel, that can be used to power vehicles and humans.  Ethanol, when drank by humans, causes a statistically significant decrease in travel as people say home in a state of total stupor.  Therefore, not only is purchasing alcohol encouraging the carbon neutral fuels industry, but it causes decreased use of fossil fuels.

Now, having established the facts, we need only develop the method.  And that would be to have bitcoin accepted for Jack Daniels by a bitcoin merchant, then to buy stock in that company.  Then you would be buying whiskey with your carbon credits from yourself, using bitcoin.

This would mean that the embarrassingly high electric bills for bitcoin miners would be okay, because you first of all wouldn't care after drinking half a bottle, therefore you would have the "high" ground, and you would have a moral issue to stand on, so you'd have the moral high ground.

I suggest this matter be further explored with bitcoin for weed, recognizing that was previously done by those courageous pioneers of RoadySilky, but darn....

They didn't have the carbon credits angle.