Would the RICO statute be far more appropriately used to investigate and prosecute the Alarmists of the tax-funded global-warming industry?
"the RICO statute would be far more appropriate if used to investigate and prosecute the tax-funded global-warming industry for its organized efforts to defraud humanity of its wealth and liberties. As exposed in the ClimateGate e-mail scandals, for example, which involved at least one of the recent letter's signatories, the tactics of the $1 billion-per-day global-warming industry include brazenly violating freedom of information laws, concealing data that contradicts their theory, bullying scientific journals and scientists into silence, threatening those who actually follow the evidence, and much more." http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/ite...
- BonnoLv 65 years agoFavorite Answer
yes, fraud, extortion, etc...........
- OscarLv 75 years ago
The problem would be in who was doing the investigation. The government wants the increased money, power and control from the global-warming scam. You really think they would find themselves guilty of running the scam?
If it looks as if the cat is out of the bag and almost everyone knows, they might throw a few small fry under the bus. But that would be it.
- MikeLv 75 years ago
Generally used against the mafia, who demand protection money from honest business people if they want to continue their way of life, and if the money is not provided, they will suggest bad things can happen to their business as well as them personally.
- Anonymous5 years ago
No. I am against the RICO act being used against skeptics, and am not in favor of it being used against warmers either. This is not a criminal matter.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- Anonymous5 years ago
If there is reasonable suspicion that some one is profiting from lying, does it matter if it is the deniers of science or the scientist who are investigated and potentially prosecuted?
- Wage SlaveLv 65 years ago
NO! Leave RICO out of it. Leave the courts out of it. Let's fight this out in the arena of public opinion. Let's enforce the FOI requests, get the information out there and let the people decide.
- BruceLv 55 years ago
No. There is no evidence that they have fudged their conclusions. (email gate stinks some, but a tiny number of people were involved, and it did not alter scientific conclusions.)
No one has EVER stepped forward and admitted fudging the science.)
Scientists are competitive. Surely by now one would have uncovered any serious mis deeds.
Besides, the site: http://variable-variability.blogspot.de/2015/02/ho... shows that the RAW data shows MORE warming than the adjusted data.