I think ^(link) therefore I err

Sunday, February 11, 2007

Global Warming Deniers

I am certain that Ellen Goodman by now has regreted her idiotic choice of words that put global warming deniers "on par" with Holocaust deniers. But since she hasn't issued an apology yet, I'll direct you to Mark Steyn today. He has a nice little piece on it. I loved this part....after going over some of ths science, he says
Are you thinking maybe it's time to turn over the page to the Anna Nicole Smith "A life in pictures" double spread? Well, that's my point. Most of us aren't reading the science, or even a precis of the science. We're just reading a constant din from the press that "the science is settled," and therefore we no longer need to think about it: The thinking has been done for us.
That's the part that the media doesn't get. We no longer trust them. And for good reason. Add in a bit from Bjorn Lomborg who is an environmental scientist who also notes
But scientists and journalists - acting as intermediaries between the report and the public - have engaged in greenhouse activism. Elsewhere calling for immediate and substantial cuts in carbon emissions, the IPCC's director even declared that he hoped the IPCC report would "shock people, governments into taking more serious action".

It is inappropriate for somebody in such an important and apolitical role to engage in blatant activism. Imagine if the director of the CIA published a new assessment of Iran, saying: "I hope this report will shock people, governments into taking more serious action."

Climate change is a real and serious problem. But the problem with the recent media frenzy is that some seem to believe no new report or development is enough if it doesn't reveal more serious consequences and more terrifying calamities than humanity has ever considered before.

Which leads us back to Iraq. The media has declared that we can't win.
Victory, as the president sees it, requires a stable liberal democracy in Iraq that is pro-American. The NIE describes a war that has no chance of producing that result. In this critical respect, the NIE, the consensus judgment of all the U.S. intelligence agencies, is a declaration of defeat.
Oddly enough, I don't read that in the NIE report. I read that unless X happens then there will be a disaster and X will be hard to do. That's different than "Victory is not an option".

Kind of like in the Global warming debate where the media has declared that humans are responsible and nothing can be done. It also has declared that unless the US signs on to Kyoto there will be disaster.

Iraq is lost and we need to bring our troops home and nothing can be done to fix it. At the same time, we can expect complete chaos and killing and more trouble if we leave.

Hindsight works well. Which is why there is a HUGE difference between global warming deniers and Holocaust deniers. My only hope is that the Iraq can be a stable democracy deniers are wrong!!