March 02, 2007
This post started out as a comment at Trying to Grok but I decided I wanted to post it here. Sarah was commenting on a defense of The Al Goracle from ThinkProgress.
The quote that bothered me the most was
There is no meaningful debate within the scientific community, so the right-wing busies itself with talk about how much electricity Al Gore’s house uses — and even then they distort the truth.If you defend overwhelming hypocrisy with overwhelming hypocrisy does that make it OK? Is it like a double negative?
Since when has been acceptable to question and debate the Consensus of the Holy Church of Global Warming? Since when is it OK to be a Global Warming Denier?
The environmentalists don't want debate. They don't want to be questioned on anything. What they want is obedience. They want you to live your live according to their rules and in manner they deem acceptable. You see they know the right way because they are smarter than you. And if in order to convince the world to live according to their wishes, a few Global Warming Evangelists have to ignore those rules, you are not too question.
It would be best if you didn't even notice. Because if you did you might point out everyone that the Environmental Emperors have no clothes.
Posted by: Stephen Macklin at 02:25 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Powered by Minx 1.1.4-pink.









