Some have noted, and I agree that it’s a misnomer to call this “ClimateGate.” In addition to the fact that simply adding “Gate” to a scandal is so late twentieth century, calling it a “Gate” would imply that it’s something that the media will go into a frenzy over, because it’s a scandal about something politically incorrect (e.g., Nixon). No, a better name for it (again, not original with me — I think it showed up in comments at one of the PJM pieces) is “Climaquiddick.” In other words, expect the media to try to whitewash and minimize it.Check the post for numerous updates, with citations for the term's growing usage.
It's the whitewashing and minimizing that's really kind of sickening. So far I haven't seen much on the denialist-left that's been worth quibbling with (mostly just stupid stuff, really); but I can't say that about this whopper of a post at Open Left, "The Puke Funnel is Trying to Disrupt Copenhagen; the CRU Hack Story Continues."
Take a couple of minutes and read through that entry. Then you'll see why there's unlikely ever to be any real "bipartisan compromise" in our lifetimes. Melanie Phillips said it best, in "Green Totalitarianism," where she suggests:
Which is the more terrifying and devastating: if people are bent and deliberately try to deceive others, or if they are so much in thrall to an ideology that they genuinely have lost the power to think objectively and rationally?That's the first thing that came to me when reading Open Left's unbelievable psychological projection. It's truly derangement - and remember, the folks involved in the CRU scandal aren't first year graduate students. I cited today Kevin Trenberth - the lead scientist at the U.N.'s IPCC - but to hear the crazed commie ghouls at Open Left, someone with Trenberth's unimpeachable credibility is blown off as "meritless."
It's truly totalitarian, that kind of leftist ideological rigidity; and that's why I get almost sick to the stomach, since I know dealing with these people will be a lifelong battle, fought for preserving a good, viable future for our children. I have to admit: It's actually kind of scary. Not only do we have a press that's in the tank for the progressive radicalism eminating from the Obamunist (remember John Holdren, the extremist at the White House, is in on the e-mail scandal), but the media elites are practically biological predetermined to nihilism. As Dr. Sanity notes, some "people, groups, and nations" are so committed to denial that their "entire sense of identity is dependent on a certain view of the world and they would rather die than relinquish that view."
Anyway, be sure to check Air Vent for lots more devastating (and scientifically rigorous) developments in "Climaquiddick":
Plus, see James Delingpole (still calling it "ClimateGate"):
AGW is about raising taxes; increasing state control; about a few canny hucksters who’ve leapt on the bandwagon fleecing us rotten with their taxpayer subsidised windfarms and their carbon-trading; about the sour, anti-capitalist impulses of sandal-wearing vegans and lapsed Communists who loathe the idea of freedom and a functioning market economy.More at Memeorandum. Also, Iain Murray, "Climategate — or Climaquiddick?"
We know it’s all a crock and we’re not going to take it.
Hat Tip: Five Feet of Fury.
2 comments:
Right Wing Nut House calls those who see a worldwide conspiracy to tax CO2 emissions "nutjobs," which might indicate he is relatively new to the virtually limitless potential for statist mischief that Copenhagen and its UN codicils offers.
I think the state-controlled MSM hacks and halfwits like Alan Colmes, formerly employed by a reputable news cable outlet, try to outdo each other in debasing their once ethical profession [well, kinda...] of journalism as they cater, kowtow, and propagate outlandish alarmist gibberish about how the sky is falling and we must bow to the Gaia goddesses of climate warming.
It's a new religion and those who are "deniers" and "skeptics" are subjected to verbal abuse rivalling that formerly reserved for heretics and heterodox religious sects.
Any fool with a few courses in the earth sciences can deduce that the sun is the propagator of 100% of global warming origo et fons. But for third-rate guttersnipes like Colmes and the silent witless MSM, that would be presuming to think logically and scientifically, something they have neither the equipment nor moral courage to attempt.
Dave in Boca,
I would disagree with you as to the point that journalism has ever been reputable. One only needs to look at the journalism profession in Revolutionary America and in the years that follow. One is also struck by the newspapers of T. Roosevelt's time. It has always been a questionable endeavor run by questionable people. They got by with it because they were usually the only game in town.
Just to add to your mention of science and scientists, here is an article by Vincent Gray, who was an expert IPCC reviewer:
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/vincent-gray-on-climategate-there-was-proof-of-fraud-all-along-pjm-exclusive/.
The real science has always been on the side of those who questioned GW as being man made. If you are a scientist then you do not hide your data nor do you try to keep others in the field from being heard or read. No one person or side has all the answers.
I suspect that now that the walls are falling down, like the Berlin Wall, we will find a large number of true scientists challenging GW and its underlying assumptions.
Conservation and smart use of resources has always been a good and laudable goal. Junk science and what the environmental lobby has become is dangerous to every living thing on this planet. If we can truly affect the environment, can we not also, in our haste, do thing we think are a plus that through poor science can do far worse?
There is not such thing as settled science. It requires the input of all concerned to solve problems.
Post a Comment