For example, understanding that global warming is not a proven science and that there is no
circumstantial evidence for global warming alarmism — which is why we see goats like political charlatans like Al Gore showing debunked graphs like the «hockey stick» to scare the folks — and, not understanding that climate change the usual thing not the unusual thing and that the climate change we observed can be explained by natural causes is the
only thing that really separates we the people from superstitious and ignorant government - funded schoolteachers
on the issue of global warming... that and the fact that global warming alarmists do not believe in the scientific method nor most of the principles upon which the country was founded.
If reasonableness is not the standard but the prohibition extends beyond malicious motivation then Human Rights Tribunals will embark not
only on the difficult task of assessing
circumstantial evidence in order to assess the Respondent's motive, but must then decide which motives are unacceptable.