Democrat AGs Begin Inquisition Against ‘Climate Change Disbelievers’

[Billy_Bob]

The rest of the human race has already provided the evidence, you just ignore it.

Stop the lying, reality is not a friend to you and is far too scary.

So you say and yet, when asked for even a tiny bit of this vast body of evidence you claim exists that substantiates the AGW hypothesis, you can't provide it....not even the smallest bit of observed measured evidence that substantiates even the most basic claim of the AGW hypothesis. If such evidence actually existed, it would be impossible to ignore....every thread would be overrun with it....all hard evidence all the time...but is that what we see?....No, we see people such as yourself claiming such evidence exists and failing every time to post it.

Tell me, what is the quantity of the human fingerprint in the climate change we have seen?....how much are humans responsible for and by what actual observed and measured evidence was that quantity derived?

You've seen this before, liar.

And just how much of this is actually caused by man?

Where is your science to prove it?

 

[Manonthestreet]

Federal law makes it a felony “for two or more persons to agree together to injure, threaten, or intimidate a person in any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the Unites States, (or because of his/her having exercised the same).”
But all is not lost for CEI. 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1985 provides a civil action for conspiracies to deprive individuals of civil rights. If I were CEI — or these attorneys general — I might give that law a read as well. Dear attorneys general, conspiring against free speech is a crime: Glenn Reynolds

 

[mamooth]

Since nobody is conspiring against free speech, that post was senseless.

Some of you conservatives need to realize you can't just manufacture an entirely new fantasy legal system, and then pretend it's the real legal system. Nobody outside of your cult is going to buy such nonsense. And if you try such nonsense in court, it will go poorly for you.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Article was written by lawyer so just admit the facts.....

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Since nobody is conspiring against free speech, that post was senseless.

Some of you conservatives need to realize you can't just manufacture an entirely new fantasy legal system, and then pretend it's the real legal system. Nobody outside of your cult is going to buy such nonsense. And if you try such nonsense in court, it will go poorly for you.

Some of you conservatives need to realize you can't just manufacture an entirely new fantasy legal system, and then pretend it's the real legal system.

You mean like charging Exxon under RICO? LOL!

 

[Manonthestreet]

Since nobody is conspiring against free speech, that post was senseless.

Some of you conservatives need to realize you can't just manufacture an entirely new fantasy legal system, and then pretend it's the real legal system. Nobody outside of your cult is going to buy such nonsense. And if you try such nonsense in court, it will go poorly for you.

Some of you conservatives need to realize you can't just manufacture an entirely new fantasy legal system, and then pretend it's the real legal system.

You mean like charging Exxon under RICO? LOL!

guy cites caselaw too .......making it up ...how bout saying somethings not a tax out of one side of your mouth and then saying it is out of the other for political purposes.....dumbass

 

[mamooth]

So, any of your lads care to tell us exactly whose free speech is being conspired against?

Be specific. Vague paranoid ramblings are not good enough. Just who is being prevented from speaking now? Give names.

 

[Manonthestreet]

So, any of your lads care to tell us exactly whose free speech is being conspired against?

Be specific. Vague paranoid ramblings are not good enough. Just who is being prevented from speaking now? Give names.

Now go read the article its specific.......

 

[Crick]

So you say and yet, when asked for even a tiny bit of this vast body of evidence you claim exists that substantiates the AGW hypothesis, you can't provide it....not even the smallest bit of observed measured evidence that substantiates even the most basic claim of the AGW hypothesis. If such evidence actually existed, it would be impossible to ignore....every thread would be overrun with it....all hard evidence all the time...but is that what we see?....No, we see people such as yourself claiming such evidence exists and failing every time to post it.

Tell me, what is the quantity of the human fingerprint in the climate change we have seen?....how much are humans responsible for and by what actual observed and measured evidence was that quantity derived?

You've seen this before, liar.

[/QUOTE]

And just how much of this is actually caused by man?

Where is your science to prove it?

I thought you claimed to be able to read a graph. Please locate and read the last line; the one that reads "Total net anthropogenic".

As for evidence, please refer to WG-I, the Physical Science Basis, AR5 at www.ipcc.ch

 

[mamooth]

Now go read the article its specific.......

That article names nobody who was being prevented from speaking freely. Did you even read it?

Again, just whose free speech is being restricted? Name names. Who is being prevented from speaking now?

If someone uses their free speech to cheat little old ladies out of their savings, they will hopefully be prosecuted. That's not an imposition on free speech. It's a punishment for criminal behavior. Only those defending such fraud would call it a restriction of free speech.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Now go read the article its specific.......

That article names nobody who was being prevented from speaking freely. Did you even read it?

Again, just whose free speech is being restricted? Name names. Who is being prevented from speaking now?

If someone uses their free speech to cheat little old ladies out of their savings, they will hopefully be prosecuted. That's not an imposition on free speech. It's a punishment for criminal behavior. Only those defending such fraud would call it a restriction of free speech.

Obviously you didnt or want to play dense......... If the lose they will be silenced on the issue and so will many others......try being honest.......please show little old ladies cheated by CEI dumbass

 

[Manonthestreet]

Your graph means nothing since they continue to admit they dont understand this or that about the climate.......

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Now go read the article its specific.......

That article names nobody who was being prevented from speaking freely. Did you even read it?

Again, just whose free speech is being restricted? Name names. Who is being prevented from speaking now?

If someone uses their free speech to cheat little old ladies out of their savings, they will hopefully be prosecuted. That's not an imposition on free speech. It's a punishment for criminal behavior. Only those defending such fraud would call it a restriction of free speech.

At a press conference on March 29, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman said “The bottom line is simple: Climate change is real,” and he and the coalition will pursue "to the fullest extent of the law” any companies committing fraud by “lying” about it.

From the OP.

 

[mamooth]

So you're saying you're in favor of fraud?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So you're saying you're in favor of fraud?

Al Gore lied, how many years in prison should he have to serve?

 

[Manonthestreet]

So you're saying you're in favor of fraud?

Disagreeing is not fraud........you assume the bogus charge is alrdy proven.......btw Exxon had money on both sides of the table.......ooooops

 

[mamooth]

Al Gore lied, how many years in prison should he have to serve?

No, he didn't lie. He never said what you claimed. He did not say the ice would be gone in 5 years. He said someone else said that. And they did. Hence, he was telling the truth.

Now, you did just lie about Gore. That's indisputable. So why did you lie? Was your lie deliberate? Are you defending fraud because you engage in it so regularly? Or are you just a dupe, repeating lies because you're brainwashed? Do you think you should be imprisoned for lying?

Fortunately, I'm not like you, and I don't think people should be imprisoned for simply lying. Simply lying isn't fraud, and that isn't illegal.

 

[mamooth]

Disagreeing is not fraud........you assume the bogus charge is already proven.......btw Exxon had money on both sides of the table.......ooooops

It is proven, by Exxon's own documents. Exxon knew global warming was real, and deliberately lied about it for money. According to our legal system, that's a form of fraud.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Al Gore lied, how many years in prison should he have to serve?

No, he didn't lie. He never said what you claimed. He did not say the ice would be gone in 5 years. He said someone else said that. And they did. Hence, he was telling the truth.

Now, you did just lie about Gore. That's indisputable. So why did you lie? Was your lie deliberate? Are you defending fraud because you engage in it so regularly? Or are you just a dupe, repeating lies because you're brainwashed? Do you think you should be imprisoned for lying?

Fortunately, I'm not like you, and I don't think people should be imprisoned for simply lying. Simply lying isn't fraud, and that isn't illegal.

Repeating a lie is not telling the truth unless you're a lib.....it was a for profit lie intentional...fraudulent with malice aforethought

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Al Gore lied, how many years in prison should he have to serve?

No, he didn't lie. He never said what you claimed. He did not say the ice would be gone in 5 years. He said someone else said that. And they did. Hence, he was telling the truth.

Now, you did just lie about Gore. That's indisputable. So why did you lie? Was your lie deliberate? Are you defending fraud because you engage in it so regularly? Or are you just a dupe, repeating lies because you're brainwashed? Do you think you should be imprisoned for lying?

Fortunately, I'm not like you, and I don't think people should be imprisoned for simply lying. Simply lying isn't fraud, and that isn't illegal.

Simply lying isn't fraud, and that isn't illegal.

That's a relief, based on his movie, Gore would be serving life if it was.

So if I say AGW is a fraud, how should I be punished?