Tim Ball is Hitler

There is generally little you can do to make yourself look worse in a conversation than compare someone you dislike to Hitler. Dr. Tim Ball should consider this. I just saw a post he uploaded a few days ago to Watts Up With That? which says things like:

The response must counteract all the issues detailed in Adolf Hitler’s cynical comments, but also the extremely commendable motive of saving the planet, used by the IPCC and alarmists.


From its inception, the IPCC focused on human production of CO2. It began with the definition of climate change, provided by the UNFCCC, as only those changes caused by humans. This effctively sidelined natural causes. The computer models produced the pre-programmed results and everything was amplified, and exaggerated through the IPCC Summary for Policymakers. The deception was very effective because of the cynical weaknesses Hitler identifies, the natural assumption that nobody could deceive, on such an important issue, and on such a scale, but also because most didn’t know what was being done.


When you understand what Adolf Hitler is saying in the quote from “Mein Kampf” above, you realize how easy it was to create the political formula of Agenda 21 and the scientific formula of the IPCC.

Which sounds pretty ridiculous. I mean, he’s basically comparing everyone he dislikes to Hitler, right? Wrong. The quote Ball refers to, which was included in his post, was written by Adolf Hitler in his book Mein Kampf. A moment’s thought would make it obvoius Hitler was not referring to his own actions. Alternatively, one could just quote the full paragraph (Ball’s excerpt begins with the third sentence and excludes the last sentence):

But it remained for the Jews, with their unqualified capacity for falsehood, and their fighting comrades, the Marxists, to impute responsibility for the downfall precisely to the man who alone had shown a superhuman will and energy in his effort to prevent the catastrophe which he had foreseen and to save the nation from that hour of complete overthrow and shame. By placing responsibility for the loss of the world war on the shoulders of Ludendorff they took away the weapon of moral right from the only adversary dangerous enough to be likely to succeed in bringing the betrayers of the Fatherland to Justice. All this was inspired by the principle–which is quite true in itself–that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying. These people know only too well how to use falsehood for the basest purposes.

Hitler was calling the Jews liars. Hitler was saying there was a massive conspiracy by the Jews to unfairly blame Erich Ludendorff for Gemany’s loss in World War I. So when Ball says of the quote:

Do these remarks explain the comments of Jonathan Gruber about legislation for the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare? Do the remarks fit the machinations of the founders of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the activities of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) disclosed in their 6000 leaked emails? It is instructive to know that Professor Gruber’s health care models are inaccessible, protected as proprietary.

The author of the quote was a leader whose lies and deceptions caused global disaster, including the deaths of millions of people. In a complex deception, the IPCC established a false result, the unproven hypothesis that human CO2 was causing global warming, then used it as the basis for a false premise that justifies the false result. It is a classic circular argument, but essential to perpetuate the phony results, which are the basis of all official climate change, energy, and environmental policies.

Realize he’s comparing everyone he dislikes to the Jews. He’s trying to take the moral high ground by saying, “You horrible people are lying, conspiring Jews and I am the righteous Hitler!”

Comparing other people to Hitler is almost as bad as it gets. About the only thing worse is comparing yourself to Hitler. If you want to do that Dr. Ball, go ahead. You’re Hitler.

On a happy note, I guess this means two major climate blogs on opposite sides of the debate can finally reconcile. Watts Up With That? apparently wants to support Hitler, and Skeptical Science is filled with people who like to play Nazi dress up:


They’re a perfect pair.



  1. Dear Brandon,

    Jews have been demonized for centuries, still are. The techniques used are the topic of Dr. Tim Ball’s post, not the purpose, and provide a possibly valid and useful explanation for events that I find inexplicable. I find myself defending Israel and Jews generally (though I don’t actually know any) simply because of the hypocrisy I see when the topic arises. I do not necessarily agree with Dr. Ball, but he is attempting to tease out a explanation… and I do not consider Hitler and NAZI’s out of bounds when trying to establish an explanation. Indeed, having such a horrific and well documented tragedy occurring in our lifetime should make WW11 and it’s history MORE useful to use as a guide in trying to explain current controversies.

    Regards, Michael

  2. Michael, first, I want to apologize for the slow response. You’ll get a faster one if you comment at my new blog. It’s pretty much the same right now (I transferred the content), but it’s self-hosted so I have a lot more control over it. I haven’t taken much advantage of that yet, but I believe have improved readability (the biggest change is text size in quotes has been improved). You can find it here:


    As for your comment, I’ve rarely experienced any hostility toward Jews or Israel. I suspect it’s partially because of my age and the fact most people I know don’t care about the Israel/Palestine conflicts. That said, I think it’s obvious to any fair-minded person Israel is, at least for the moment, the better choice. It doesn’t encourage terrorists who openly state they want to destroy entire civilizations. Whoever is right on the overall issues, there is no way I am going to support people fighting on a side when they say they want to kill me.

    But none of that has anything to do with Tim Ball’s post. Ball’s post didn’t use Nazis to make a point. Ball didn’t bring up Hitler because he felt Hitler had some great insight into the matter. Ball talked about Hitler and the Nazis because he wanted to smear people he didn’t like with the association. That’s it. And that’s not okay.

    It would have taken me less than 15 minutes to edit Ball’s post to keep all the same points, use the same quote and references, but do it in a way which didn’t paint people as Nazis. It wouldn’t be hard. That shows what his intent was. There’s no other reason he’d have written what he written since it wouldn’t have been hard write the same thing without making such awful associations.

    The point is emphasized by the fact Ball apparently had no idea what the quote he was using was about. As this post shows, if he had known, he would have realized he was painting himself as Hitler, not his opponents. That shows his comparisons weren’t based upon some deep understanding of the issues or history. They were just lame attempts at point scoring.

    If Ball had wanted to write about Hitler for legitimate purposes, he would have known what the quote was about. He would have pointed out Hitler was insane to believe there was some great Jewish conspiracy. He then would have pointed out Hitler’s insanity manifested by him projecting his own mentality upon the people he dislikes.

    But that would have required an actual attempt at discussion, not just borderline name-calling.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s