The left is keen to suppress speech they oppose in any way they can, and the politicization of science and climate has played a vital part in this effort.
“Climate change denial should be a crime,” declared the Sept. 1 headline in the Outline. Mark Hertsgaard argued in a Sept. 7 article in the Nation, titled “Climate Denialism Is Literally Killing Us,” that “murder is murder” and “we should punish it as such.”
But you can’t, and not just because of your so-called “Consensus.”
We can choose to ignore that consensus is a political term, not a scientific one.
We can disagree on whether Climate “science” is less about science and more about politics and politicians funneling taxpayer dollars into it.
We can agree or disagree about any or all of it because the moment someone spent American tax money, it became subject to scrutiny by anyone in the United States, complete with First Amendment protections.
Be they scientist, layman, blogger, author, press or pundit. Criminalizing dissent is not an option.
And while the idea of using the criminal justice system to silence opposing scientific “thought” is bad enough. Using it to silence people asking questions about how the government spends its money on science and the results of that research is unconstitutional.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, IS a crime.
And while you can prosecute for fraud, you can’t charge people with crimes for publicly denying your science, and a lot of people disagree with your science. Even when that science serves only to advance your progressive socialist takeover of energy and, by extension, everyone that uses it.
