Scott Connery at Rational Public Radio recently wrote about the absurdities of extreme environmentalists, focusing on a statement by Australian global warming hawker Richard Glover that, “Surely it’s time for climate-change deniers to have their opinions forcibly tattooed on their bodies.”
Although hyperbole, Connery writes that such statements are not too far removed from environmentalists’ actual views:
Even for a movement known for absurdly radical stances, like the Kyoto protocol goal of cutting CO2 emissions to below 1990 levels, Glover has a profound detachment from reality.
He thinks the science is settled, and only intentionally wrong-headed people continue to resist the glory of the green plan for the world. It’s such a obvious calamity that he compares AGW denial with the left’s decades long whitewashing of communist regimes. How convenient. The left made a mistake, and now the right did too, so apparently we should all just forget about the hundreds of millions dead thing.
That’s right demanding proof for AGW is morally equivalent to covering up mass genocide.
However in his long smear/argument from intimidation he never provides any evidence to support his position. He never counters any of the arguments made by critics. What about the arguments presented in the Great Global Warming Swindle? What about the whole Climate Gate embarrassment? What about the perpetual string of disproven environmentalist panics like global cooling, acid rain, the hole in the ozone layer, or DDT?
The closest he comes is saying that deniers claim climate change ended in 1998, and therefore they are stupid. I’ve certainly never heard anyone make that claim.
I have heard the claim that mean temperatures have been declining since `1998, and therefore any model which predicted rising temperatures is obviously deeply flawed. However, it’s much easier to knock over straw men that he sets up.
In addition to the whole lack of evidence problem for AGW, he never shows that rising temperatures are a bad thing.