Story submitted by Stephen Rasey

On July 12, I wrote a comment cautioning not to underestimate the Gore Climate Reality event scheduled for Sept. 14, 2011. Mixing metaphors, I said that this was an “All In” bet and that this was Gore’s D-Day.

Pickett’s Charge from a position on the Confederate line looking toward the Union lines, Ziegler’s Grove on the left, clump of trees on right, painting by Edwin Forbes via Wikipedia

A better analogy is that this is Gettysburg, July 3, 1863. Al Gore’s Climate Reality is “Pickett’s Charge”: thousands of troops, marching in formation in the open field, supported by the artillery of the internet and mass media, bent on destroying the deniers that stand in the way of themselves and Washington D.C.

Today we are engaged in a great Civil War of testing whether our nation, or any nation, conceived in liberty and individual freedom, can long endure the calls to “save the planet” through strong government and world government to better control the use of energy, land, and air by constraining the freedom of its subjects.

Back in late-June 1863, Robert E. Lee carried with him knowledge of a letter from Jefferson Davis dictating terms of peace to Lincoln. It was Lee’s strategy to bring the Union Army of the Potomac into the open, destroy it, and then march on Washington. The Letter would be delivered to Lincoln and hopefully end the war.

Today, Al Gore carries with him the plans for the IPCC Rio+20 Sustainability Agenda. The “Climate Reality” Charge is to bring “denier’s” out into the open, destroy them, and carry the momentum into Rio meetings in June 2012 and Washington for the Nov 2012 elections. The green energy carpetbaggers are already among us. After a Rio recharged by a Gore victory, there will simply be more of them acting without restraint.

The critical question is, “Is there a strong enough opposition standing between the Charge and Washington, D.C.?”

Today, my answer is, “No, the skeptic’s are not yet strong enough.” Skeptics are more of a disorganized guerrilla force of sharp-shooters. (Of course, I could be completely wrong and I’m just blowing the cover of an entrenched ambush.)

I do not think skeptics can field an army; it is not in our individualistic nature. But that does not mean we cannot prepare the battlefield. We know from which direction they will come. We know the type of ammunition they use – much of it is blanks – false, misleading statement, but full of fire, smoke, and noise. The skeptics artillery of web sites can be zeroed-in. Counter their arguments before they have the opportunity to fire theirs. We can field forward observers, and squads armed with facts and backup.

We must make it obvious to all observers the skeptics’ side in the climate debate is fighting against slavery of billions of people. I’m willing to help as a defender of freedom. It will take some organization.

Who are our, Buford, Reynolds, Chamberlin, and Hancock?

In what may be a related action, Anthony Watts has asked readers to find quotes for “ice free Arctic by the year xxxx”. This is the kind of preparing the ground and zero-in we need to do now in advance of September.

We know who the CAGW leaders will be. Find every false, misleading, scary, idiotic, non-scientific statement they have made in the past twenty years. Create an index by name with pages listing those statement with links to the source. Keep it factual. Let their own words come back to haunt them.

We know the basics of their arguments and lines of “evidence”. Cross reference each of the statements above with the type of evidence.

How can we efficiently do this without a Wiki? A Wiki would only be vandalized. We also want an efficient division of labor. I don’t suggest we eliminate duplication, but let’s avoid quadruplication. Somewhere we should start a list of the Whos and Whats to research. Volunteers can comment that they are searching sources X over dates Y-Z and will report back in 48 hrs. Someone will have to organize it.

In the responses to Anthony’s plea for help, many people provided links without helpful context and additional information about Who, When, What and Where. We can do better. But the response has been helpful showing that Anthony (and other moderators) could delegate research work to the readership of the blog and they can do more target location and synthesis.

Is there a simple six column Excel format OR six element Text format we could use to make a table driven content page work?

Person, Topic, Date, Link, Quote, Comment and Context

Or

[P] Person(s)

[T] Topic

[D] Date

[L] Link

[Q] Quote

[C] Comment

Share this: Print

Email

Twitter

Facebook

Pinterest

LinkedIn

Reddit



Like this: Like Loading...