Post by Brandon Shollenberger
Rhetoric in climate change debates has never been highbrow. There’s lots of name calling, gotcha games and other petty behavior. Still, there’s something about suggesting people you dislike should die that turns most people off. That’s why I was somewhat surprised when I read a blog post by Greg Laden which has this hypothetical situation:
Ann Coulter, Bill O’Reilly, and Rush Limbaugh are in a boat. They are in the middle of a deep, cold lake. If the boat sinks they will die of hypothermia and their corpses will sink to the bottom. There is a device in the boat that will sink it instantly, or alternatively, propel the boat to the safety of the shoreline where there are three martinis waiting for them, but it all depends on all three of them correctly answering a question…The question is, “Is global warming real, human caused, and important, yes or no.”
You’ll note Laden doesn’t actually suggest anyone should die. He makes it into a game, suggesting they “Agree or Die.” And it is still just a hypothetical situation. It’s not pleasant, but it’s not horribly horrible either.
Naturally, Peter Gleick couldn’t live with such a tame statement, chiming in to say:
Very nice, Greg. Thanks.
And the Coulter, O’Reilly, Limbaugh situation seems like a win-win no matter what they answer. (btw, check the spelling on Coulter.)
That’s right. Peter Gleick thinks three people dying would be a “win.” The only other winning option to him is for them to agree with him. He is, quite literally, suggesting it would be good if people who don’t agree with him died of hypothermia.
Having found the link to Greg Laden’s post in Peter Gleick’s Twitter feed, I naturally responded to him there. Having nothing but contempt for Gleick, my Twitter response was not kind:
@PeterGleick It was nice to see you say it’d be good if people you dislike died. You really are insane!
Gleick’s response was… interesting:
@Corpus_no_Logos I guess you didn’t bother to read Laden’s piece. No one dies.
Of course nobody died in the piece. I was talking about what Gleick said, not what Greg Laden said. After completely missing the point, he promptly blocked me.
This is progress. Remember, Michael Mann recently said in his AGU presentation:
And to me, probably the best indication of the fact that there is, we are making progress is the heated rhetoric, the violent heated rhetoric, that we are now seeing from climate change deniers. It’s become far more outlandish, far more violent than anything we’ve seen in the past. And to me, that’s the signature of a dying campaign.
I’d say Agree or Die is pretty heated rhetoric. That means Peter Gleick is making progress for us!
- Peter H. Gleick, ‘genius’ (wattsupwiththat.com)
- Self admitted cyber thief Peter Gleick is still on the IOP board that approved the Cook 97% consensus paper (wattsupwiththat.com)
- Fish Gotta Swim, Birds Gotta Fly, and Peter Gleick Gotta Lie (fakegate.org)
- Watch Michael Mann’s self aggrandizing AGU presentation (wattsupwiththat.com)
- The MAD MEN of Climate-Change Alarmism (wattsupwiththat.com)