UNESCO publication (The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization): "Climate denial has seriously impeded aggressive mitigation efforts that could have averted our present climate emergency. It has magnified the risk that humanity locks in to catastrophic global climate change. The people in positions of authority in states, or industrial groups whose lies have put us and our descendants in peril, should be held accountable. The damage that climate deniers do is heinous, and they have no excuses. The time has come to prosecute them for postericide." ...
"International criminal law should be expanded to include a new criminal offense that I call postericide. It is committed by intentional or reckless conduct fit to bring about the extinction of humanity…Just as international criminal law holds military leaders to account for genocide committed by their troops, it should hold political and economic leaders to account for postericide committed under their authority. These leaders should go to trial at the [International Criminal Court]…"
John Holdren characterized Prof. Roger Pielke Jr. as being outside the 'scientific mainstream' at a Senate climate hearing for his views on extreme events and climate change
Pielke Jr. Fires Back at Holdren: 'When a political appointee uses his position not just to disagree on science or policy but to seek to delegitimize a colleague, he has gone too far.'
Pielke Jr. responds: 'It is rare for political appointee in any capacity -- the president's science advisor no less -- to accuse an individual academic of holding views are are not simply wrong, but in fact scientifically illegitimate. Very strong stuff.'
'Holdren's response is sloppy and reflects extremely poorly on him. Far from showing that I am outside the scientific mainstream, Holdren's follow-up casts doubt on whether he has even read my Senate testimony. Holdren's justification for seeking to use his position as a political appointee to delegitimize me personally reflects poorly on his position and office, and his response simply reinforces that view.'
'Is this really coming from the president's science advisor? Holdren is flat-out wrong to accuse me of omitting a key statement from my testimony. Again, remarkable, inexcusable sloppiness.'
'The bottom line here is that this is an extremely poor showing by the president's science advisor. It is fine for experts to openly disagree. But when a political appointee uses his position not just to disagree on science or policy but to seek to delegitimize a colleague, he has gone too far.'
Real Science Rebuttal: 'No actual science is permitted in the Obama administration. There is not one shred of evidence that killing raptors and bats will improve the climate. Alaska has cooled more than two degrees since the turn of the century.'
Is Mann still bluffing? Analysis: 'Don't expect Mann to carry through on his threat. Once he realises just exactly who he is up against – and it's not just NR and Steyn – and what is at stake for the whole climate change racket, for Penn State's coffers, and for his reputation, expect weasel words to the effect that 'on reflection, it's not worth it'