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.
Laugh? Cry? Run for the hills? Only admit my doubts in private? Good lord this is rather bizarre and considering the source I am even more shocked than I was by the GliekGate affair. Their blatant attempts to tie scientific inquiry to holocaust denial is just so over the top one has to conclude they have nothing intelligent to say.
I guess I’m stupid, insensitive, moronic, slow…WHAT was your “poor editorial choice” 2 years ago?
I read the article, and found nothing “offensive” or “wrong headed”. Am I missing something? Am I not “hyper elite (sorry, “sensitive”) enough”.
Someone, fill me in!
Max (not Mad, just Max)
It appears more and more of these bozos have entered the “anger” stage. Can “bargaining” be far behind?
The warming and it causing some significant problems side of the debate are basically right on a large number of the issues, but have been tuned out as a result of how they have acted.
Name one thing they got right.
@ur momisugly DaveG says:
May 9, 2012 at 12:39 pm
Lets Face it we skeptics are just plain bad to the bone!
WHAT ARE SKEPTICS
Flat Earth believers. Anti science, Tobacco pushing, smoking rednecks. Intimidating and life threatening bully’s of Global warming scientists. (Especially in Australia) Tormentors of Climate scientist by demanding FOI data to substantiate the dire predictions of CAGW.
**************************************************************************
You forgot ‘gun-toting’, ‘meat eating’, and a few others. Bosephus said it best: “A Country Boy Can Survive”. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4s0nzsU1Wg
This isn’t limited to commentary on climate science. I’ve not yet come across a public figure in the media who self describes as an “ethicist” on his CV who didn’t actually mean “wanker”. 😉
The play itself is excellent. I think anybody not an out and out AGW bigot would get some enjoyment from this. Recommended if you are in Melbourne.
Max Hugoson says:
May 9, 2012 at 1:45 pm
“Someone, fill me in!”
The fascist BNP from the UK tried to hook onto skepticism; somebody sent Anthony a link and, not knowing what the BNP stands for, Anthony had a post about it. But was quickly clued in by UK readers.
Unfortunately – in this world Ethics are as relative as the truth.
I see that Hamilton brings up the death threats to climate psientists.
I don’t really see 10 insulting emails and another recounting an overheard conversation as being credible death threats.
He also states that there were investigations after the leaking of emails from UEA CRU. Can someone please let me know when those actually happened? Certainly hasn’t in the past. Crystal balls are wonderful. When/if the investigations do happen, I think the outcomes will be devastating.
DaveE.
DirkH says:
May 9, 2012 at 3:48 pm
If you believe all that the MSM say about BNP, you may as well include UKIP.
They say the same about EDL too, but whenever there’s trouble at an EDL meeting it’s the AFL, (Anti Fascist League,) causing the trouble.
Strange how illiberal liberals are.
DaveE.
Here is a three minute video regarding the play The Heretic.
David A. Evans says:
May 9, 2012 at 5:08 pm
“DirkH says:
May 9, 2012 at 3:48 pm
If you believe all that the MSM say about BNP, you may as well include UKIP.”
Wrestling with pigs etc… I decline the offer.
DirkH says:
May 9, 2012 at 5:32 pm
Dirk. I am apolitical. I just see the lies and propaganda for what it is.
DaveE.
It is extraordinary that someone as full of inchoate rage and hatred as Hamilton could become a professor of ethics anywhere.
He is a seriously creepy individual, and the author of indisputedly the most nauseating piece of climate agit-prop I have ever read (moreover, published by the State Broadcaster).
Barf bags at the ready: http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/28372.html
In comparison to some of his comments on other subjects his rant about the play would indicate that Professor Clive Hamilton was using his medication.
Rick Bradford says:
May 9, 2012 at 6:06 pm
———————-
You were not kidding about the barf bags, that article you linked was insane. How someone like this is given a voice anywhere outside of their own rant-blog is beyond me.
Ah well, at least I can add “artistic wanking” to my vocab, I admit it made me laugh.
Heggs.
when the playwright was interviewed on ABC RN book show a couple of weeks back the interviewer who is also heavy prowarmist was so OTT and acusatory it was embarrasing.
the author came out looking sane and kept his sense of humour at all times.
damn fine fellow:-0
and as for clive C
over here down under hes?
a Dag( not in the friendly matey useage)
its the stuff hangs off the butt end on a sheeps wool
Clive hamilton is a kind of fagan when it comes to the crazy left in oz. you should check out his creepy photo on Wikipedia…. They loony lefties just love him… He is a particular favourite of Anna rose and her equally creepy, Marxist husband, simon the sheik. I’m glad that Clive is on their side… It makes it so easy…
Those that preach morality are often most lacking.
“AMB
With ethicists like this, who needs scoundrels?”
This is brilliant, I’m adopting it!
You know you’re not doing so well when you make Big Oil look like models of propriety ….
Andrew Bolt is well know to provide in-substantiate sources and opinions in Australia, if you bother to use him as a source in your blog. Eventually you’ll be apologizing once more for poor editorial choices.
[“In-substantiate sources and opinions” ? Do you need that edited? Robt]
Gerjaison: “Andrew Bolt is well know to provide in-substantiate sources … ”
I find his blog to be extremely well referenced … unlike his enemies who prefer attacks like yours.