I have to laugh at the juxtaposition of rhetoric today. It’s like a gift from the universe.
While Joe Romm launches yet another angry and hateful rant over at Climate Progress because of a poor editorial choice I made two years ago, and for (in his opinion) not being upset enough about the Heartland billboard fiasco (selective outrage actually, since he refuses to cite or link to my initial piece and poll critical of Heartland and Romm too), citing “let their houses burn”Steve Zwick in Forbes who relied on the heavily edited WaPo piece which didn’t use most of my comments from the 15 minute interview, we get this stunning window into the soul of an ethical green professor down under.
Andrew Bolt at the Herald Sun in Australia provides this “truly extraordinary stream of abuse” describing the rant of Professor Clive Hamilton, who, much like Joe Romm, is a hyperactive supporter of AGW alarmism:
On being abused by Clive Hamilton, Professor of Public Ethics
Former Greens candidate Professor Clive Hamilton is furious:
Who would have thought the Melbourne Theatre Company would get into bed with Andrew Bolt?
But here’s the thing. Hamilton is a professional moralist – a Professor of Public Ethics, no less. Standing for goodness, he denounces ‘the highly personal attacks”, “vituperation” , “vilification of individuals” .and “angry ridicule” that he detects from sceptics.
Yet in response to the MTC staging a play with the sceptic as a hero, Hamilton lets fly with a truly extraordinary stream of abuse:
…discredited … rat-bags … denier .. conspiracy theorists … fossil-fuel industry hatchet men … cyber-bullies … shit-spreaders … shock jocks … bullshit … insidious … grubbier … distortion … cowardly … artistic wanking … poison … slippery falsehoods … travesty
Wow. Just wow.
Full story here at Bolt’s: On being abused by Clive Hamilton, Professor of Public Ethics
On Romm, Zwick, Hamilton and all the other haters, who see themselves as pure defenders of the planet, casting us as “evil deniers”, without being able to self-examine the horrid rhetoric of their own, you just have to laugh.
UPDATE: Tom Fuller writes in via email with this part I missed:
Clive Hamilton, Vice Chancellor’s Chair, Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics
“Perhaps Richard Bean’s next project will be The Heretic 2, another “funny, provocative and heart-warming family drama” in which the maverick academic David Irving, lone defender of the truth, uncovers definitive evidence that the Holocaust never happened. Sent to Coventry by his fellow historians — a spineless lot who have for years been manipulating the evidence to protect their funding and their reputations — David is in the end vindicated; the Holocaust was a Zionist plot after all.”
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I’d add Bora “SciAm Online Editor” Zivkovic and Phil “Bad Astronomer” Plait to the list.
Very selective vision. And quite common among the individuals who self-identify with this group ideology. Those we constantly hear proclaiming themselves tolerant and civil… are the least so among us. The psychological projection is text book.
Hamilton’s outburst is a disgrace to his office
http://www.clivehamilton.net.au/cms/index.php?page=About
An Australian reader of this Blog should make an official complaint to Hamilton’s university, alleging that he is “bringing the University into disrepute”.
Not surprising as this is the typical “do as I say not do as I do” liberal/progressive attitude.
Jay Davis
When the activists indulge in horrid rhetoric, the evil deniers are blind and deaf to the fact that this is righteous anger, analogous to that of Our Lord on casting out the money-changers from the Temple. While we grub about as catspaws of the evil Big Carbon, they soar above the Mundane, serving a higher calling and saving the Planet from mankind. They really believe that.
Boy, Joe Romm sure does a great job at nursing a grudge.
Referring back to a previous thread which expertly exposes blatant example of cherry picking creating a fraudulent paper by a selective use of the Yamal series, I would guess that our scepticism would be much less, IF the alarmists did not consistently insist on wilfully misrepresenting and cherry picking data to suit their flawed arguments. When they present an anomalous tree as the norm, and regard all the other trees in the region (by dropping better tree series’ in the process) as irrelevant, then they have a major problem of a complete lack of credibility.
They can swear all they like, in fact their Ad Homs are only making their “cause” look even worse and less credible by the day.
Some thoughts from someone who’s been fighting a very similar battle for over 30 years at this point (against the “secondhand smoke alarmists”): Be happy! You’ve quickly moved to the third step in the classic Ghandian progression: “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win!”
Those of us involved in the tobacco fight were “ignored” for years, with anything we said simply being falsely passed off as “tobacco industry propaganda.” More recently, in just the last decade or so, antismoking advocates moved to calling us “Denialists” and “Flat Earthers.” And it’s only quite recently that we’ve seen them mount full frontal attacks against individuals and organizations fighting such things as mandated smoking bans and excessive targeted taxation.
The fact that you would be publicly attacked with such strong language by someone “respectable” in their movement shows that you’re being effective and have them worried. Don’t fall into the trap of mud-slinging back with them though: this is where you need to appear at your most calm, scientific, and professional in your arguments. You know where their lies are and which lies are weakest: pick them out and attack them in ways that can’t be denied. They’ll attack with propaganda and emotion, using the children and playing on exaggerated fears. You need to respond with pure science while making sure that it’s basic and clear enough that the “average guy in the street” can look at it quickly and see that it’s solid.
Final suggestion: Consider producing a short, printable, bindable booklet that your supporters can print on their own and bring to hearings and meetings. The booklet should be a little bit bombastic in style to grab a reader’s attention, but it needs to have a lot of clear, basic demonstrations of how people are being misled and clear direction as to what they should do about it, while making sure there’s absolutely nothing in it that can be successfully attacked by your opposition. The best illustration of what I’m suggesting is simply the one I created in my own area hosted over at The Club site:
http://kuneman.smokersclub.com/PASAN/StilettoGenv5h.pdf
Michael J. McFadden
Author of “Dissecting Antismokers’ Brains”
I view these coincidences as proof that:
a. God exists
b. He has a wicked sense of humor
I find it fascinating that the Climategate materials were “stolen” or “hacked”, but the Heartland materials were “leaked”. It is more fascinating because the British authorities have yet to determine how the Climategate materials were made public, while the Heartland materials were admittedly “stolen” (with the exception of the obvious forgery).
They are starting to get a bit worried now aren’t they?
Heartland was right.
A synopsis of the play:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Heretic_(play)
The quote that hit me hardest was the C.S Lewis one:
Because they don’t see themselves as religious zealots, they are blind to their own zealotry and would burn the non-believers at the stake, for their own good.
The comments on Bolt’s story are worth reading.
And these hate filled ranters have the gall to abuse Heartland minor dip of the toe into the mud?
I could only stomach reading a bit from each of these ranters.
Reminds me of a football game I played in as a child. A kid on the opposite side made a great catch and then ran the ball all the way to the end zone – the wrong way. When we pointed this out (he had just scored a touch down for our team) he freaked out and tried to blame us.
The AGW alarmists kids are pretty mad right now.
Hey, I’m a Canucklehead, so I’m immune.
“…artistic wanking…”
Gosh how would he critique “The Vagina Monologue”?
Count me now among the doomsayers: Global Warming has reversed the Enlightenment. Heretics, beware. –AGF
If you are in Melbourne go and see the play, the London version was fantastic.
Well if you have to give Hamilton his due, he sure can be entertaining in delievering his rant…
re : michaeljmcfadden says(against the “secondhand smoke alarmists”)
I personally am very happy that smoking has been kicked out of bars, hotels, airlines, resturants, offices, and yes, cars with children in them.
Nothing more vile than disgusting to me than smoke from a smoking addict. Yes, I used to smoke, and quit.
In addition to the obvious psychological projection, it strikes me also that the most vitriol of this nature is hurled by those least qualified to judge the science.
Well, there are two arguments to be made on this issue.
First, one can concede that there will be a double standard and argue that it is better that one side adhere to standards instead of all standards being abandoned.
Alternatively, one can say that it is silly to maintain the farce of civilized discourse and just call them names and be called names in one’s turn. This tends to be a bit self regulating since postings that are heavy on abuse get ignored.
I’d say let’s go back to 18th century standards of vituperation – let ‘er rip.
(P.S. while I doubt the Heartland billboard was effective, I have no real objection to it since it is exactly in line with what Kaczynski believes.)