Newspeak

[billvon 3,132]

Newspeak, from Wikipedia:

========
Newspeak is the fictional language in the novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, written by George Orwell. It is a controlled language created by the totalitarian state as a tool to limit freedom of thought, and concepts that pose a threat to the regime such as freedom, self-expression, individuality, and peace. Any form of thought alternative to the party’s construct is classified as "thoughtcrime".

Newspeak is explained in chapters 4 and 5 of Nineteen Eighty-Four, and in an appendix to the book. The language follows, for the most part, the same grammatical rules as English, but has a much more limiting, and constantly shifting vocabulary. Any synonyms or antonyms, along with undesirable concepts are eradicated. . . .

According to Orwell, "the purpose of Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of expression for the world-view and mental habits proper to the devotees of IngSoc, but to make all other modes of thought impossible. Its vocabulary was so constructed as to give exact and often very subtle expression to every meaning that a Party member could properly wish to express, while excluding all other meaning and also the possibility of arriving at them by indirect methods. This was done partly by the invention of new words, but chiefly by eliminating undesirable words and stripping such words as remained of unorthodox meanings, and so far as possible of all secondary meaning whatever."
=========
From CNN:

On climate change, Florida officials told to speak no evil

Updated Mon March 9, 2015

Washington (CNN) - Maybe if nobody says it, it won't happen.

That appears to be the policy of Florida Gov. Rick Scott's administration, according to a report from the Florida Center for Investigative Reporting that suggests state environmental officials were directed not to use the term "climate change" after the Republican took office in 2011.

"We were told not to use the terms 'climate change,' 'global warming' or 'sustainability,'" said Christopher Byrd, an attorney for the Department of Environmental Protection from 2008 to 2013.

"That message was communicated to me and my colleagues by our superiors in the Office of General Counsel."
=============

[quade 4]

Memory Hole can't be very far behind.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[lawrocket 3]

When sciencd becomes an adjunct for politics one must expect politics to become and adjunct for science.

I've been saying it for years. The other side will have power and use it the same way with opposite intention. It was like the criticism of Inhofe for sponsoring true declaration that climate change is real. Because Inhofe's definition left out the whole man made part

As ye sow...

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[rushmc 23]

You post climate change political pissing contests

I post NEW studies that bring into question the real affects vs the claims of the alarmists

Nice contrast dont you think?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/03/07/silencing-skeptics-financing-alarmists/

Quote

Renewable energy companies want to perpetuate the mandates, subsidies and climate disruption claims that keep them solvent. Insurance companies want to justify higher rates, to cover costs from allegedly rising seas and more frequent or intense storms. Government agencies seek bigger budgets, more personnel, more power and control, more money for grants to researchers and activist groups that promote their agendas and regulations, and limited oversight, transparency and accountability for their actions. Researchers and organizations funded by these entities naturally want the financing to continue.

You would therefore expect that these members of Congress would send similar letters to researchers and institutions on the other side of this contentious climate controversy. But they did not, even though climate alarmism is embroiled in serious financial, scientific, ethical and conflict of interest disputes.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[airdvr 210]

I was talking with my daughter today. She's in her second year. In her Oceanography class AGW is taught as fact. The war is over...we lost.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[Andy9o8 3]

Quote

She's in her second year.

Which means she's not a freshman.

[billvon 3,132]

>I was talking with my daughter today. She's in her second year. In her
>Oceanography class AGW is taught as fact. The war is over...we lost.

I bet those bastards teach her evolution, heliocentrism and the effectiveness of vaccines as fact, too.

[rushmc 23]

airdvr

I was talking with my daughter today. She's in her second year. In her Oceanography class AGW is taught as fact. The war is over...we lost.

Just look at Bill's reply
These liberals are NEVER wrong

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[lawrocket 3]

What do you think of the sources of this? I mean, 350.org isn't exactly known for its strict adherence to fact.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[billvon 3,132]

>These liberals are NEVER wrong

Do you oppose the teaching of climate change, evolution, vaccine effectiveness and heliocentrism?

Do you support the banning of words that describe politically inconvenient themes?

[rushmc 23]

billvon

>These liberals are NEVER wrong

Do you oppose the teaching of climate change, evolution, vaccine effectiveness and heliocentrism?not the point. Many of these you example here are taught as fact. AWG is among them. Your question misses the point completely. Most likley on purpose

Do you support the banning of words that describe politically inconvenient themes?

Like the politicians in the UK want to ban climate skeptics? No

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[lawrocket 3]

billvon

>These liberals are NEVER wrong

Do you oppose the teaching of climate change, evolution, vaccine effectiveness and heliocentrism?

Do you support the banning of words that describe politically inconvenient themes?

Which definition of climate change should be taught? Climate change, the scientific definition, hasn't been denied. The political definition is different.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[jakee 1,610]

rushmc

Like the politicians in the UK want to ban climate skeptics? No

Yep, we're going to string them up along the beach and wait for rising sea levels to finish them off.

Hang on, I meant what? Ban them how?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[lawrocket 3]

jakee

*** Like the politicians in the UK want to ban climate skeptics? No

Yep, we're going to string them up along the beach and wait for rising sea levels to finish them off.

Hang on, I meant what? Ban them how?

You UK lads have some ideas..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFO0ayOz9FY

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[JerryBaumchen 1,471]

Hi Andy,

Quote

Which means she's not a freshman.

Nice, very nice.

Jerry Baumchen

[rushmc 23]

jakee

*** Like the politicians in the UK want to ban climate skeptics? No

Yep, we're going to string them up along the beach and wait for rising sea levels to finish them off.

Hang on, I meant what? Ban them how?

Ok
Not a politician but
Some still think this way
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/03/06/climate-alarmist-only-climate-alarmists-should-be-allowed-on-television/

Quote

Scientists and journalists who mislead the public about ‘global warming’ should be banned from television.

So says the producer of a highly tendentious and misleading new eco-propaganda movie about global warming, apparently blissfully unaware of the irony of his position.

Robert Kenner is the producer of Merchants of Doubt, a documentary which seeks to claim that climate scepticism is nothing but a fossil-fuel-funded conspiracy co-ordinated by the same kind of cackling evil-doers who tried to persuade you that smoking doesn’t cause cancer.

Like the Obama administration, the movie takes for granted the notion that catastrophic man-made climate change is real, that all the scientists promoting the theory are reliable, honest and principled, and that the only possible reason anyone might have for claiming otherwise is that they are “merchants of doubt” – ie corrupt disinformers who deliberately and cynically seek to hide the truth about global warming from the public because they have been paid to do so by sinister corporate interests.

and then you got this

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/03/09/the-bbcs-climate-change-coverage-is-not-just-dishonest-but-illegal/


Such desire for an honest debate you have

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[jakee 1,610]

So that's your way of saying "I'm sorry, I was completely wrong" is it? Charming

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[kallend 2,175]

Has it ever occurred to you that quoting Breitbart is about as valid as quoting Mother Jones, in terms of objectivity?

Thought not.

(In fact Mother Jones is rather more thorough with its fact checking.)

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

jakee

So that's your way of saying "I'm sorry, I was completely wrong" is it? Charming

Hell no!

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

kallend

(In fact Mother Jones is rather more thorough with its fact checking.)

You have not followed many of their latest stories then

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

From a Google search

Quote

This Article Has Been Retracted | Mother Jones

www.motherjones.com/politics/.../donald-baldwin-retractio...




Mother Jones





Nov 26, 2014 - This story included erroneous information. Waterford, NY, fire chief Donald Baldwin was not the commenter in question. We regret the error and ...


Mother Jones calls on O'Reilly to apologize - POLITICO.com



www.politico.com/.../mother-jones-calls-on-oreilly-to-apologize-...




Politico





Feb 20, 2015 - The editors-in-chief at Mother Jones have written a letter to Fox News requesting that Bill O'Reilly apologize for saying that journalist David ...

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[jakee 1,610]

rushmc

***So that's your way of saying "I'm sorry, I was completely wrong" is it? Charming

Hell no!

That's odd, since you seemed to concede that you were completely wrong.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[rushmc 23]

jakee

******So that's your way of saying "I'm sorry, I was completely wrong" is it? Charming

Hell no!

That's odd, since you seemed to concede that you were completely wrong.

You need the Evelyn Woodhead Speed Reading course

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[jakee 1,610]

rushmc

*********So that's your way of saying "I'm sorry, I was completely wrong" is it? Charming

Hell no!

That's odd, since you seemed to concede that you were completely wrong.

You need the Evelyn Woodhead Speed Reading course

People in glass vocabularies shouldn't throw insults

So are you saying you were correct, and that UK politicians are planning to 'ban' climate change opponents?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?