Should Global Warming/Climate Change denial be a crime?.

[Defeated Romanticist]

Simple question, Should people who deny global warming/climate change or question the findings of the IPCC be prosecuted?. What punishment should they recieve (if any) ?.

Science isn't about being popular, it's about being right. The climate change croud should be glad there are deniers. If nothing else, it keeps them on there toes.

[ibis]

This FUD?

Not as such...Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt?

[Auditor #9]

Of course not. The majority of those who deny that climate change is real, or man-made, do so because they believe the extremely expensive misinformation campaigns put out by interested parties like Exxon.

Those who funded, designed, or initiated such campaigns, and thereby retarded political action for their own benefit? Yes - in about 20 years, when enough of the chickens have come home to roost, I think there would be scope for a charge of crimes against humanity, but you'd need to prove that they had sufficient evidence to know that what they were doing was actually fraudulent.

Maybe it's the full moon but Champa may have a point. If there was enough evidence that certain pollutants cause climatic disruption (which causes death and could cause mass extinction) wouldn't polluters who persist risk the charge of crimes against humanity and by extension, their propagandists?

Big IF, of course.

I don't think you can hold it against those who simply did nothing because there was no legislation requiring action, or because they genuinely felt that the scientific consensus was wrong.

However, let's take the board of ExxonMobil, who together with US coal companies has actively funded disinformation campaigns, using tactics, personnel, and companies developed to use FUD techniques on behalf of the tobacco companies - yes, I would like to see them put on trial, as well as those responsible at the PR companies. The campaigns started immediately scientists first started warning of climate change, and have not let up since. These campaigns are not 'free speech', but deliberate fraud on a massive and lethal scale in the service of corporate profits.

Fear Uncertainty Doubt. Microsoft are getting it for ******************************ing around with the markets and Philip Morris got it for killing smokers but the likes of ExxonMobil and Shell seem bulletproof. Could anything like you say above happen to them? Could they end up in an international court if there was one? Do oil companies end up in any court for negligence when there is a spill or anything come to think of it?

General Motors ************************ed up a mass transit system in Los Angeles in the thirties, it's in the nature of the big beast to protect itself.

[youngdan]

It should definitely be a crime. To enphasise their guilt they should be sent to Siberia to chill for life.

[Kf]

Simple question, Should people who deny global warming/climate change or question the findings of the IPCC be prosecuted?. What punishment should they recieve (if any) ?.

They should receive a pat on the back and congratulations ffor common sense. The "global warming" alarmists should be rounded up and given a day by daty account of the Irish summer of 2007.

At this stage anyone who continues to deny climate change is the modern day equivilant of the 19th century flatearthers. They should be allowed excercise their right to free speech but then neutered to protect the human gene.

[Champa]

They should be allowed excercise their right to free speech but then neutered to protect the human gene.

Hitler would be proud of you.. Infact if Hitler were alive today he would probably be a member of the Green Party.

[ibis]

They should be allowed excercise their right to free speech but then neutered to protect the human gene.

Hitler would be proud of you.. Infact if Hitler were alive today he would probably be a member of the Green Party.

There you go! Only took a couple of pages to get the result you were looking for.

[Pidge]

They should be allowed excercise their right to free speech but then neutered to protect the human gene.

Hitler would be proud of you.. Infact if Hitler were alive today he would probably be a member of the Green Party.

Well, I'm sure that he'd share our famous "the Bolshy Jews are behind climate change" policy.

[Gombeen]

They should be allowed excercise their right to free speech but then neutered to protect the human gene.

Hitler would be proud of you.. Infact if Hitler were alive today he would probably be a member of the Green Party.

My, my, Godwin's Law has kicked in early. Well done.

[Eddiepops]

Simple question, Should people who deny global warming/climate change or question the findings of the IPCC be prosecuted?. What punishment should they recieve (if any) ?.

No, but we should think about locking up moronic trolls starting inane threads to push their bizarre obsessive agendas.

That said, I do think that climate change deniers (none of whom seem to have more than a documentary's level of information on the subject) and their fellow travellers should seriously consider the impact of their actions and the potential effects of their efforts should they be proven incorrect. ( I feel they have been proven incorrect already, but that's another argument). They should also consider the precautionary principl, take a deep breath and see a counsellor about their relationship with their mothers.