James Delingpole jokes about deaths of climate scientists


4:22 pm - April 7th 2013

by Sunny Hundal    


      Share on Tumblr

Here’s how the Telegraph’s star blogger James Delingpole, also featured in the Spectator as a writer on climate science, starts his latest blog:

Should Michael Mann be given the electric chair for having concocted arguably the most risibly inept, misleading, cherry-picking, worthless and mendacious graph – the Hockey Stick – in the history of junk science?

Should George Monbiot be hanged by the neck for his decade or so’s hysterical promulgation of the great climate change scam and other idiocies too numerous to mention?

Should Tim Flannery be fed to the crocodiles for the role he has played in the fleecing of the Australian taxpayer and the diversion of scarce resources into pointless projects like all the eyewateringly expensive desalination plants built as a result of his doomy prognostications about water shortages caused by catastrophic anthropogenic global warming?

It ought to go without saying that my answer to all these questions is – *regretful sigh* – no.

This sort of tripe is becoming increasingly typical for Delingpole.

Recently, he compared wind-farms to paedophilia. In 2010 he posted the name and address of a constituent who wrote an email to his MP, which led to the constituent getting threats.

It’s also hilariously ironic that Delingpole is attacking others on science, when he himself admits he doesn’t know science or has scientific expertise.

But that’s besides the point.

The point here is that when Delingpole disagrees with people, he fantasises about their horrible deaths.

But hanging? Hell no. Hanging is far too good for such ineffable toerags.

Indeed, it would be nice to think one day that there would be a Climate Nuremberg. But please note, all you slower trolls beneath the bridge, that when I say Climate Nuremberg I use the phrase metaphorically.

Ahh a metaphorical Nuremberg for scientists. Well that’s ok then.

Keep in mind that some of the people he mentions have already been getting death threats from climate change deniers.

This guy is sickening and hateful, and it beggars belief he is given a prominent platform in the national media (including the BBC).

    Share on Tumblr   submit to reddit  


About the author
Sunny Hundal is editor of LC. Also: on Twitter, at Pickled Politics and Guardian CIF.
· Other posts by


Story Filed Under: News

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Reader comments


I’m sure some of these columnists are going nuts. There going nuts because their mind is full of hate for things they can’t control and it’s showing.

Sunny, will you also write about the climate scientists who think that deniers should be murdered too. An example is Richard Parncutt who said that deniers sentenced and executed – in his personal opinion. That’s the same as James Delingpole who is entitled to his personal opinion. Just as you are entitled to the opinion that James is a twat and I am to think that you are a blog owner who is desperately trying to up the readership numbers.

3. willow chery

Err, I’m sorry, you are seriously expecting us to believe that the phrase ‘fed to the crocodiles’, is a serious call for climate change believers to be murdered. Are you frickin serious. It’s a satirical throw away line, a comical metaphor, as he clearly states. he also clarifies his point by saying very definitely that he does not really think they should be killed. “It ought to go without saying that my answer to all these questions is – *regretful sigh* – no.” In other words, it’s satire you mirthless hypocrites.

However, if you want to talk about people really being called to be murdered, how about this little film which depicts the horrific, graphic murder of children, in front of other children, because they have doubts about climate change being real. Who made the film? Left wing Climatenazis, that’s who!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zH71XCmsbCc

4. Robin Levett

@SadButMadLad:

There are distinctions between Delingpole and Parncutt, but I would generally say that neither side should be advocating the death penalty for members of the other.

Now: your defence of Delingpole’s comments?

@SadButMadLad I disagree that it is the same. Suggesting that a group of people should be executed is, in my opinion, abysmal whoever says it. The difference is that James Delingpole is writing these things in a major UK newspaper and, as such, allowing him to do so suggests that they condone such a view. They have the right to decide whether or not they (as his employer) find his views acceptable. James Delingpole is certainly entitled to his opinion. His employers (and other media outlets) are not obliged to let him express his opinion in their newspaper/outlet if they regard it as unacceptable.

I suppose there is a difference. Richard Parncutt did not regret that it was not possible to murder deniers. No opinion, more a statement that could be seen as encouraging others to commit a criminal act. James is just putting forward his opinion. As for editorial control. James his hired to give his opinions. Doesn’t mean the telegraph agrees with them. In fact how can it, it’s not human. As for the owners and editors, they want a range of opinions to get as many readers as possible. Richard Parncutt used university resources to put out his statement calling for the murder of deniers. There is only one thing in Parncutt’s favour – he deleted the offending article, though only after a lot of bad publicity forced the university to act.

There is only one thing in Parncutt’s favour – he deleted the offending article, though only after a lot of bad publicity forced the university to act.

Why in the nine hells was a professor of Music Psychology putting up an article about climate change anyway?

Oh, as an aside that technically means Mr Parncutt is NOT a climate scientist, and thus is not an example of ‘climate scientists who think that deniers should be murdered too’.

@willow chery
Video posted by MinuteMan with details: –
‘About Militia Commander – Indiana’
‘I’m just a red-blooded, freedom-loving American patriot, like I know you are, too. Be a part of the 2nd American revolution and TAKE A STAND FOR THE CONSTITUTION… study it & defend it!! – Call the Indiana Militia toll-free at 888-314-1986 for info about how to join.’

Can’t get more lefty than that in Indiana.
I prefer YouTube’s ‘Downfall’ spoofs.

Does anyone know, now that the torygraph has gone seven day, whether the chief science correspondent is Delingpole or Booker?

These right wingers are increasingly publishing e mails of people they dislike – or photos if their houses (eg of Cruddas’ in today’s Mail)…

And then there was that “No Pressure” video – exploding children in that one!

13. Patrick James

SadButMadLad wrote:

“Sunny, will you also write about the climate scientists who think that deniers should be murdered too. An example is Richard Parncutt”

Cylux wrote that Richard Parncutt is a professor of Music Psychology.

So if Richard Parncutt is not a climate scientist then I think SadButMadLad needs to tell us of other climate scientists who have said that deniers should be murdered.

Sunny, can you ever stop being a propagandist?

Delingpole says quite clearly:
“It ought to go without saying that my answer to all these questions is – *regretful sigh* – no.”

Meanwhile, you do not delete comments on here that threaten death to Tories…

Mmmmm…double-standards? Yes, you are a hypocrite as well as a propagandist.

15. Robin Levett

@SadButMadLad #6:

Still waiting for that defence of Delingpole’s comments. Or is your entire defence that some obscure Australian music psychologist made comments that could be argued as being similar?

@wg
Same video. Posted this time by Lee Doren.
‘Doren is a hardcore free market capitalist. Favorite targets of his include leftists (in general), environmental regulation, global warming, socialism, liberal bias in the media, and big government. Doren appears to be neutral on abortion and pro gay marriage, and is known to support the death penalty (in contrast to many libertarians).’
‘While Doren accepts that evolution is fact, he claims he is not particularly worried about creationism being imposed in classrooms, and believes that creationist politicians often do less harm than liberal politicians.’
Source: Rational Wiki.

So, another sit on the fence guy.

17. Peter Gilkes

He just likes to be noticed. If you refuse to notice him – no more James Delingpole.

JUST A JOKE, LIKE ON TOP GEAR

If anyone said that it was “regrettable” that we aren’t allowed to hold James Delingpole down and stamp on his testicles until they rupture, you’d soon get a billion “libertarians” howling and complaining that nasty people are being violent and mean and shouldn’t be allowed to express their opinions in such a violent and mean way. Most of these people that talk about “freedom of speech” only believe in it when it’s their speech.

19. Peter Gilkes

Sounds good to me Celia.

The Telegraph used to be considered a serious newspaper. Even that twit Moore wouldn’t have put this shit in it. Shameful.

Sunny,

Oh dear. James Delingpole says climate scientists should not be killed and you try to spin it into an outrage story.

James Delingpole, Jeremy Clarkson, Rod Liddle etc have what is lacking from so many on the left (you included it would appear) – a sense of humour.

Without one all topics are ground into an earnest powder of moral certainty in an attempt to cajole people into accepting ‘what’s good for them’.

@Kojak – Ever watched Jon Stewart on Comedy Central’s Daily Show. Now there’s someone on the left with a sense of humour and I don’t think I’ve ever heard him find humour in the suggestion that it was sad that we couldn’t kill people we disagreed with.

Also, I’ve actually read James Delingpole’s article and if it was satire, it was extremely subtle.

“And then there was that “No Pressure” video – exploding children in that one!”

I do remember how righties saw the funny side at the time.

He’s so hilarious, I wonder if he does kid’s parties. In all seriousness, if this wasn’t an attempt to legitimize the routine use of violent vitriol against climate science, then what was the point of it?

Attention seeker seeks attention shocker.

What a total non-story this is.

It is, I suppose, ironic that this Sunny’s reaction to an article which complains about:

the fairly small minority of hard left activists, whingeing Guardianistas, professional victims and bien-pensant ideologues who seek to silence freedom of speech by cynically creating moral equivalence between metaphorical violence and real violence.

Is to call for Delingpole to be fired.

It’s also quite nice in that Delingpole manages in his blog (by the way, why didn’t you provide a link Sunny?) to rebut Sunny’s piece more or less entirely:

the best they could do was a desperate cheap shot which required them deliberately to misunderstand a harmless metaphor.

Our culture deserves better than to have the terms of debate dictated by malign, politically motivated, professional offence-takers.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100210866/an-english-class-for-trolls-professional-offence-takers-and-climate-activists/

@Tim J Maybe I haven’t read the Sunny’s post carefully enough, but I can’t find a call for James Delingpole to be fired. What I can find is the statement “it beggars belief he is given a prominent platform in the national media (including the BBC)”. I don’t see anything wrong with media outlets being held to account for the views of their presenters. In the same way that James Delingpole is entitled to express his views through metaphor, others have the right to express the view that they think his metaphor is objectionable. I don’t think that is dictating the terms of the debate. It is simply expressing an opinion.

27 – fair point. Sunny only implies it. Michael Mann actually called for it.
http://junksciencecom.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/screen-shot-2013-04-07-at-11-11-03-am.gif

He doesn’t actually want to kill climate scientists, I’m sure. He’s just getting paid.

Being civil, truthful or sensible is affirmatively not part of his job description. In fact were he to become any of these they would find someone else to pay.

@Tim J Apologies for the pedantry, but he doesn’t actually call for him to be fired, he asks the question “will the Telegraph continue to allow …. James Delingpole to keep job?”.

To be fair to Michael Mann, he is personally named in an article in which the author suggests that it is regretful that he (Michael Mann) amongst others cannot be executed. I think I would find that pretty annoying, not to mention slightly concerning and might start to worry about my personal safety. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not necessarily suggesting that James Delingpole is inciting others to commit murder, but that doesn’t mean that it won’t spark the idea in someone else’s mind (or more correctly, that Michale Mann won’t – quite reasonably – consider this a possibility).

By reacting in this way, Sunny H is doing precisely what Mr Delingpole wants him to do. He really has fallen for the bait. I find the Delingpoles of this world tiresome, but I refuse to do more than turn away with a weary yawn. There is nothing worse for a naughty little boy (of whatever age) than to be told that he is boring and that he will be ignored whatever he may say.

32. Chaise Guevara

Michael Mann’s question seems rather irrelevant given that Delingpole didn’t actually call for his murder.

I agree that the whole “fed to the crocodiles” bit should be a fairly big hint that he’s joking around. Also, your title kinda makes it sound like some climate scientists did die and he’s joking about it, which would be far more censurable.

Surely, we’re missing the point, the real problem is paragraphs like this:

“This isn’t to say that there isn’t a strong case for the myriad dodgy scientists-on-the-make, green activists, posturing and ignorant politicians, rent-seeking corporatists, UN apparatchiks, EU technocrats and hopelessly out-of-their-depth environment correspondents who talked up the global warming scare to be brought to account for the vast damage they have done to the global economy, for the people they have caused to die in fuel poverty, for the needless regulations they have inflicted on us, for the landscapes they have ravaged with wind farms, and so on.”

Mixing casual calls for execution, even if they are “metaphorical”, with this kind of rabid scapegoating is certainly incitement in my book.
If you actually took his crap seriously (and from the comments a certain hard-core apparently do) and you really believed the whole of climate science was united in a vast conspiracy to undermine democracy and raise your fuel bill or whatever, wouldn’t you want those responsible dead?

34. DumbToryNarrative

@Tone: Will you ever stop being a far-right propagandist?

” James Delingpole, Jeremy Clarkson, Rod Liddle etc have what is lacking from so many on the left (you included it would appear) – a sense of humour.”

Kojak I agree and you on the right are so funny.
Although I have heard many on the right not liking jokes at their expense, on maggie deaths for instance
I know your not on the right, that is even funnier.

Can I ask the righties on the thread, such as Kojak (sorry your not) why do you hate these scientists so much.
Also Kojak in another thread you castigated a joke about Thatcher’s death. You said it was acting like a prat. But joking about the death of a climate scientist is not acting like a prat but possessing a sense of humour.

You’d be surprised how many “Climate Scientists” aren’t actually scientists of the climate. Richard Parncutt is into music, Rajendra K. Pachauri who headed the IPCC is a railway engineer, Bill McKibben is an author and journalist.

I’m not defending Dellingpole’s actual comments, but I am defending his right to say them. If Sunny is going to attack James for his comments, then he has to attack others who say the same thing from the opposite side. Either all such comments are bad, or none. You can’t pick and choose.

38. Robin Levett

@SadButMadLad #37:

You’d be surprised how many “Climate Scientists” aren’t actually scientists of the climate. Richard Parncutt is into music, Rajendra K. Pachauri who headed the IPCC is a railway engineer, Bill McKibben is an author and journalist.

Who has described any of those three as climate scientists?

What this shows is that the denialists’ cupboard is bare. They have no arguments to counter the climate change consensus. All they can do is hysterically indulge in fetid fantasies. And, probably, condemn people when they celebrate the death of Thatcher for not respecting another human being.

The irony is that the first PM to bring up the subject of climate change was Thatcher.
Beloved by Delingpole, Kojak, Tone etc.

Haha, I love how some people have taken what he said as anything more than a piece of satire, and what is even more amusing is how its been spun into a piece of propaganda. I am sure, seeing as he has obtained so much press from this, that he has done what he needs to.

@39. Briar

Just one question though. Why do you seem to define ‘consensus’ as fact? Many terrible things have been passed under the guise of consensus. It doesn’t take away from a debate on the facts and merits.

42. Robin Levett

@Freeman #41:

<blockquote.Just one question though. Why do you seem to define ‘consensus’ as fact? Many terrible things have been passed under the guise of consensus. It doesn’t take away from a debate on the facts and merits.

I don’t know about Briar, but from my point of view the answer is simple; the consensus is not one of people, but of evidence. The consensus of evidence is such that the debate that the denialists really want – whether the Earth’s climate sytem is warming, and whether man bears significant responsibility for it – isn’t on the facts, because they have none on their side. That’s why they’re called denialists.

When are the BBC going to stop inviting this bucket of excrement onto their Daily Politics? It’s bad enough that they reek the studio out with Douglas Murray’s shit smell, but Delingpole is norovirus-infected diarrhoea by comparison.


Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. Not just NIMBYs: understanding anti-wind energy campaigners | barnard on wind

    [...] Robert Bryce (USA), James Delingpole [...]





Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.