# Why do teabaggers think liberals are fearful? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [October 31, 2010, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-teabaggers-think-liberals-are-fearful/559001 "2010-10-31T20:08:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bosda_di_chi_of_tricor/32/16845_2.png) [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2010, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-teabaggers-think-liberals-are-fearful/559001/122 "2010-12-29T22:50:31Z")
> [@El\_Gui](#): > > Looks like conservatives might be the fearful ones? > > [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/8228192/Political-views-hard-wired-into-your-brain.html](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/8228192/Political-views-hard-wired-into-your-brain.html) But you cited the wicked, debbil-worshiping Science as your source. Which, as every true Conservative knows, is a Lib-ur-el (read “worse than Communist”) propaganda-thingee. So it don’t count. ---
**Author:** ![kauffner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e9c0ed/32.png) [@kauffner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kauffner)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2011, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-teabaggers-think-liberals-are-fearful/559001/123 "2011-01-02T17:48:38Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > They are scientists too (the OP’s at RealClimate), and they demonstrate where the consensus is. Why is RealClimate consensus, but Dyson not? By definition, it’s not a scientific consensus as long as there are prominent scientists who disagree. Here is a list of 800 peer reviewed articles that are skeptical of various aspects of AGW: [Popular Technology.net: 1350+ Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting Skeptic Arguments Against ACC/AGW Alarmism](http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html) The often-repeated claim that 97 percent of scientists support “the consensus” is based on a Web survey with fewer 100 self-selected participants. > [@](#): > > Cite? That is not his say so, but what teabaggers and denier republicans say. There is an extended discussion of the advantages of economic growth in the article I cited before: [The Question of Global Warming | Freeman Dyson | The New York Review of Books](http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2008/jun/12/the-question-of-global-warming/) Dyson calls it DICE (Dynamic Model of Climate and the Economy). The number one reason I don’t believe in AGW is because it is led by people who would say anything to advance an anti-growth agenda. John P. Holdren, Obama’s scientist advisor, was a heavy duty ice age monger back in the 1970s, just like Steven Schneider. So he can do cooling, he can do warming, whatever advances the cause. Check out this graphic: [http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/time\_gw\_covers\_large.jpg](http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/time_gw_covers_large.jpg) ---
**Author:** ![kauffner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e9c0ed/32.png) [@kauffner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kauffner)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2011, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-teabaggers-think-liberals-are-fearful/559001/124 "2011-01-02T17:56:44Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > It is the experts in Climate Research or related science that we have to rely on; and no, **scientists are not experts on everything** , they specialize and then become experts. By this “logic,” we should ask paranormal researchers if ghosts are real. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2011, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-teabaggers-think-liberals-are-fearful/559001/125 "2011-01-02T18:12:51Z")
> [@kauffner](#): > > Why is RealClimate consensus, but Dyson not? By definition, it’s not a scientific consensus as long as there are prominent scientists who disagree. Here is a list of 800 peer reviewed articles that are skeptical of various aspects of AGW: [Popular Technology.net: 1350+ Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting Skeptic Arguments Against ACC/AGW Alarmism](http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html) The often-repeated claim that 97 percent of scientists support “the consensus” is based on a Web survey with fewer 100 self-selected participants. Check this thread and see what dopers thought about PopTech and his sorry list. > **[Do Peer-Reviewed papers exists supporting skepticism of "man-made" global...](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=568429)** > > Proponents of government action to regulate CO2 all in the name of preventing a “man-made” global warming “catastrophe” will declare that no peer-reviewed papers exists supporting skepticism of “man-made” global warming alarm. I argue this is not... > [@kauffner](#): > > There is an extended discussion of the advantages of economic growth in the article I cited before: [The Question of Global Warming | Freeman Dyson | The New York Review of Books](http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2008/jun/12/the-question-of-global-warming/) Dyson calls it DICE (Dynamic Model of Climate and the Economy). The number one reason I don’t believe in AGW is because it is led by people who would say anything to advance an anti-growth agenda. John P. Holdren, Obama’s scientist advisor, was a heavy duty ice age monger back in the 1970s, just like Steven Schneider. So he can do cooling, he can do warming, whatever advances the cause. Check out this graphic: [http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/time\_gw\_covers\_large.jpg](http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/time_gw_covers_large.jpg) :rolleyes: “Watts up” is also one of the most pathetic citations you can make. > **[Comparing Temperature Data Sets](https://tamino.wordpress.com/2010/12/16/comparing-temperature-data-sets/)** > > In light of Anthony Watts’ latest idiocy comparing GISS and UAH temperature data without bothering to put them on the same scale, I thought it might be interesting to compare different temper… > **[Anthony Watts: Pants on Fire](https://tamino.wordpress.com/2010/10/16/anthony-watts-pants-on-fire/)** > > In my last post I made two predictions. The second one was this: Second: Either Anthony Watts won’t answer my question about why he’s so fond of less than 6 years’ data when we have over 30 (and th… [![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/dcxVwEfq4bM/maxresdefault.jpg "Watts Up With Watts?") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcxVwEfq4bM) > **[greenman3610](https://www.youtube.com/user/greenman3610#p/u/9/-wbzK4v7GsM)** > > Knocking down the nonsense of Climate denial. ---
**Author:** ![Beware\_of\_Doug](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/278dde/32.png) [@Beware\_of\_Doug](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beware_of_Doug)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2011, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-teabaggers-think-liberals-are-fearful/559001/126 "2011-01-02T18:14:33Z")
> [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](#): > > Don’t you mean: “Many kids nowadays are having it drilled into them that they won’t have a future, that the world will be flooded and boiling by the time they grow up, _unless there is change_”? No, unless we completely destroy what little is left of American industry by protecting the environment, which will slaughter what slender profit margin still exists. It’s us or nature - whose side are _you_ on??? (I don’t believe this; I’m just trying to show how comically bozotic the reasoning is. Why, you’d almost think the conservatives are the fearful ones…until you realize that it’s a cynical argument fed to the gullible to keep them happy about the huge profitability and low responsibility of big business.) ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2011, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-teabaggers-think-liberals-are-fearful/559001/127 "2011-01-02T18:17:34Z")
> [@kauffner](#): > > By this “logic,” we should ask paranormal researchers if ghosts are real. You did not check the video uh? Incidentally, the experts you check are magicians or psychologists that do properly explain how humans come up with “paranormal” phenomenons. > **[Watch Showtime Shows & Movies - Try for Free](https://www.paramountplus.com/brands/showtime/)** > > Start your free trial to watch Showtime shows & movies. Stream original series, movies, documentaries, and more. Try 7 days for free. Cancel anytime. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2011, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-teabaggers-think-liberals-are-fearful/559001/128 "2011-01-02T18:22:01Z")
> **[The Question of Global Warming | Freeman Dyson](https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2008/06/12/the-question-of-global-warming/)** > > I begin this review with a prologue, describing the measurements that transformed global warming from a vague theoretical speculation into a precise As for Dyson, when his results are clearly based on erroneous assumptions, it is safe to say that his solutions will also be off base. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2011, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-teabaggers-think-liberals-are-fearful/559001/129 "2011-01-02T18:47:42Z")
I forgot to add: Nordhaus, the economist that made/works with DICE, that Dyson claims to be using, is frequently mentioned as a global warming skeptic; even though he has been advocating an internationally harmonized $30 to $50 /ton carbon tax be adopted. He emphasizes building an international framework for carbon taxation in case increases as new information warrants. This is BTW a constant for denier sources nowadays, when finally good citations appear on this subject, the citations turn out to be twisted to say that they agree with the overall claims of the deniers, and this is more notorious when people of some expertise \*\*appear \*\*to defend the anti-science position. It does not matter that people with more experience like Pat Michaels, Lomborg or Norhaus agree with the science and even report that indeed AGW is a problem. Unfortunately some of those experts continue to play to (and get paid by the) denier media **and politicians** to continue to get those experts to throw bones to the deniers that sound vaguely like the anti science they peddle. The deniers think that they will continue to fool all. Well, at least they do fool a good chunk of the American people. ---
**Author:** ![kauffner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e9c0ed/32.png) [@kauffner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kauffner)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2011, 4:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-teabaggers-think-liberals-are-fearful/559001/131 "2011-01-03T04:31:41Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Incidentally, the experts you check are magicians or psychologists that do properly explain how humans come up with “paranormal” phenomenons. I have no interest in the paranormal. My point was that people whose livelihoods depend on a certain belief can’t be considered objective on the subject: priests on Catholicism, therapists on psychotherapy, paranormal researchers on ghosts, and AGW researchers on AGW. Michael Mann’s “hockey stick” graph has been repeatedly exposed as a hoax, a “trick” to “hide the decline,” as the Climategate e-mails put it. Do we ask him, and only him, if the accusations are true? That’s basically what the academic committees investigating Climategate did. ---
**Author:** ![kauffner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e9c0ed/32.png) [@kauffner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kauffner)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2011, 7:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-teabaggers-think-liberals-are-fearful/559001/132 "2011-01-03T07:08:14Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > I forgot to add: Nordhaus, the economist that made/works with DICE, that Dyson claims to be using, is frequently mentioned as a global warming skeptic; even though he has been advocating an internationally harmonized $30 to $50 ton carbon tax be adopted. First, Dyson didn’t have economic argument. Now we can’t trust him because the economist he uses has proposed a carbon tax. Am I keeping up? > [@](#): > > It does not matter that people with more experience like Pat Michaels, Lomborg or Norhaus agree with the science and even report that indeed AGW is a problem. Pat Michaels? The guy Ben Santer wants to, “beat the crap out of”, according to the Climategate e-mails? He’s been accepted as a member of the consensus in good standing? Well, then you might be interested in this: [http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/228291/dog-ate-global-warming/patrick-j-michaels](http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/228291/dog-ate-global-warming/patrick-j-michaels) The gold standard of science is the “reproducible result.” CRU chief Phil Jones does not believe in science: “We have 25 years or so invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it?” ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2011, 7:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-teabaggers-think-liberals-are-fearful/559001/133 "2011-01-03T07:51:26Z")
> [@kauffner](#): > > I have no interest in the paranormal. My point was that people whose livelihoods depend on a certain belief can’t be considered objective on the subject: priests on Catholicism, therapists on psychotherapy, paranormal researchers on ghosts, and AGW researchers on AGW. Michael Mann’s “hockey stick” graph has been repeatedly exposed as a hoax, a “trick” to “hide the decline,” as the Climategate e-mails put it. Do we ask him, and only him, if the accusations are true? That’s basically what the academic committees investigating Climategate did. As it was not only committees in academia that exonerated the scientists, I will have to say you are still off base and unreliable. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2011, 8:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-teabaggers-think-liberals-are-fearful/559001/134 "2011-01-03T08:04:26Z")
> [@kauffner](#): > > First, Dyson didn’t have economic argument. Now we can’t trust him because the economist he uses has proposed a carbon tax. Am I keeping up? Yes, that is clear, Dyson can not be trusted as he misunderstand what the DICE guy actually said. But there are other reasons why Dyson should be dismissed. [http://climateprogress.org/2009/04/27/npr-on-the-media-dyson-romm/](http://climateprogress.org/2009/04/27/npr-on-the-media-dyson-romm/) > [@kauffner](#): > > Pat Michaels? The guy Ben Santer wants to, “beat the crap out of”, according to the Climategate e-mails? He’s been accepted as a member of the consensus in good standing? Good enough to be called to congress and to attempt to increase the doubts on how bad it could be (this is basically what guys that are still involved in the science but working for misleading outfits like the Heritage Institute and oil companies are reduced to) And still he got the crap beat by Ben Santer: > **[greenman3610](https://www.youtube.com/user/greenman3610#p/a/u/2/nwPnz3AJ0qQ)** > > Knocking down the nonsense of Climate denial. > [@kauffner](#): > > Well, then you might be interested in this: [http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/228291/dog-ate-global-warming/patrick-j-michaels](http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/228291/dog-ate-global-warming/patrick-j-michaels) The gold standard of science is the “reproducible result.” CRU chief Phil Jones does not believe in science: “We have 25 years or so invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it?” As the investigation showed, most of the requests made with the freedom of information act were rejected by the officials in charge, they did agree more often than not that the requests were frivolous or silly. And that was even before he was exonerated not only by his academic peers, but also by the British Government. > **[Phil Jones Exonerated by British House of Commons](https://www.desmog.com/2010/03/31/phil-jones-exonerated-british-house-commons/)** > > The British House of Commons today issued a report exonerating Professor Phil Jones, the director of the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia.  Dr. Jones was embroiled in controversy following the theft of internal emails and... ---
**Author:** ![kauffner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e9c0ed/32.png) [@kauffner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kauffner)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2011, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-teabaggers-think-liberals-are-fearful/559001/135 "2011-01-03T14:27:21Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > The problem that is ignored here is that Bin Laden and company are radical wahabbi (radicals of an already radical Muslim group), and wahabbi’s see Shia Islam (Iran) as an evil twisting of their faith. They seem to be able to team up all the same, just like the Nazis and the Communists in WWII. Iran is currently arming the Taliban, which has the same ultra-Sunni ideology as al-Qaeda. In any case, Iran has its own proxy terrorist groups, namely Hamas (Sunni Palestinian) and Hezbollah (Shiite Lebanese). They don’t even need a real terrorist group. They could use their own agents and then just deny everything, like when the Libyans blew up that Pan Am flight over Scotland. With any luck, this is an academic exercise. I expect Israel to hit Iran before long. Obama has already authorized the transfer of the specialized bombs they need, according to the Wikileaks documents. ---
**Author:** ![Capitaine\_Zombie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e95f7d/32.png) [@Capitaine\_Zombie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Capitaine_Zombie)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2011, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-teabaggers-think-liberals-are-fearful/559001/136 "2011-01-03T20:02:47Z")
> [@kauffner](#): > > They seem to be able to team up all the same, just like the Nazis and the Communists in WWII. Iran is currently arming the Taliban, which has the same ultra-Sunni ideology as al-Qaeda. Cite (if you put in National Review, dont expect to be taken seriously) ? By the way Nazis and Communists spent far more energy and time fighting each other than being allied, IIRC Soviet Union was the key to beating Nazi Germany. You might want to think your examples through a little more. > [@kauffner](#): > > In any case, Iran has its own proxy terrorist groups, namely Hamas (Sunni Palestinian) and Hezbollah (Shiite Lebanese). Since when is Hamas connected in any way with Iran? (Apart from being swarthy I mean. And speaking a language you dont understand). ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2011, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-teabaggers-think-liberals-are-fearful/559001/137 "2011-01-03T20:12:05Z")
This thread has gone far off-topic, and it’s no longer related to the recent elections. I’m locking the thread. People who are interested in the subject should start a thread in Great Debates. The subjects of climate change, fear, and terrorism probably deserve separate threads, not one big confusing one. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-teabaggers-think-liberals-are-fearful/559001.md?page=6)