oldephartte (oldephartte) wrote,

Slander as representing 'scientific consensus'

Dr. Shearman diagnoses men who walked on the Moon, Nobel Prize winners, as 'delusional'
Dr Shearman, Gastroenterologist, has also effectively declared at least 2 Nobel Prize winners in Physics are “the biggest threat to human survival”. So there, Ivar Giaever (Superconductors) and Robert Laughlin (Quantum Hall effect). And into the bin for you Freeman Dyson, Edward Teller, Frederick Seitz, Robert Jastrow (Founding Director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies) and William Nierenberg (Manhattan Project Member and Director Emeritus of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography). You are all mentally defective, so sayth the doc of intestines.

( Given that is the brilliant crowd who gave bomber and war criminal Obama a 'peace prize' before he had a chance to do anything, there may be a point in questioning the judgement of that august body )


Don’t waste your energy on on the converted, the real question is at what point will “climate change activism” be recognised as the new age cult it is?

I mean seriously all the boxes have been checked,

By Rick Ross, Expert Consultant and Intervention Specialist

Ten warning signs of a potentially unsafe group/leader.
Absolute authoritarianism without meaningful accountability.
No tolerance for questions or critical inquiry.
No meaningful financial disclosure regarding budget, expenses such as an independently audited financial statement.
Unreasonable fear about the outside world, such as impending catastrophe, evil conspiracies and persecutions.
There is no legitimate reason to leave, former followers are always wrong in leaving, negative or even evil.
Former members often relate the same stories of abuse and reflect a similar pattern of grievances.
There are records, books, news articles, or television programs that document the abuses of the group/leader.
Followers feel they can never be “good enough”.
The group/leader is always right.
The group/leader is the exclusive means of knowing “truth” or receiving validation, no other process of discovery is really acceptable or credible.

If the general population are willing to accept the opinions of an unsolicited authority then they should be given that choice, otherwise they should accept their destruction of liberties with the usual apathy until the reality of complacency bitch slaps them into conciousness.

Tags: climate change. science
  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.