Guest essay by Eric Worrall
h/t michel – According to Guardian author Keith Kahn-Harris, Trump’s enabling of climate “deniers” is comparable to and possibly influenced by the allegedly growing tendency of extreme anti-semites to openly celebrate the mass murder of Jews in WW2, instead of cloaking their hatred with holocaust denial.
Denialism: what drives people to reject the truth
From vaccines to climate change to genocide, a new age of denialism is upon us. Why have we failed to understand it?
By Keith Kahn-Harris
Fri 3 Aug 2018 15.00 AEST…
Those who were previously “forced” into Holocaust denial are starting to sense that it may be possible to publicly celebrate genocide once again, to revel in antisemitism’s finest hour. The heightened scrutiny of far-right movements in the last couple of years has unearthed statements that might once have remained unspoken, or only spoken behind closed doors. In August 2017, for example, one KKK leader told a journalist: “We killed 6 million Jews the last time. Eleven million [immigrants] is nothing.” A piece published by the Daily Stormer in advance of the white nationalist rally in Charlottesville that same month ended: “Next stop: Charlottesville, VA. Final stop: Auschwitz.”
…
Still, over time it is likely that traditional denialists will be increasingly influenced by the emerging post-denialist milieu. After all, what oil industry-funded wonk labouring to put together a policy paper suggesting that polar bear populations aren’t declining hasn’t fantasised of resorting to gleeful, Trumpian assertions?
…
It is hard to tell whether global warming denialists are secretly longing for the chaos and pain that global warming will bring, are simply indifferent to it, or would desperately like it not to be the case but are overwhelmed with the desire to keep things as they are. It is hard to tell whether Holocaust deniers are preparing the ground for another genocide, or want to keep a pristine image of the goodness of the Nazis and the evil of the Jews. It is hard to tell whether an Aids denialist who works to prevent Africans from having access to anti-retrovirals is getting a kick out of their power over life and death, or is on a mission to save them from the evils of the west.
If the new realm of unrestrained online discourse, and the example set by Trump, tempts more and more denialists to transition towards post-denialism and beyond, we will finally know where we stand. Instead of chasing shadows, we will be able to contemplate the stark moral choices we humans face.
…
Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/aug/03/denialism-what-drives-people-to-reject-the-truth
What utter filth. Comparing climate skepticism to celebrating the murder of millions of Jews. Suggesting that people expressing skepticism of shaky scientific claims actually want to cause the death of millions. For shame, Guardian.
Climategate email 1120593115.txt, retired CRU director Phil Jones speaking.
… As you know, I’m not political. If anything, I would like to see climate change happen, so the science could be proved right, regardless of the consequences. This isn’t being political, it is being selfish …
Source: Wikileaks
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Who’s celebrating the Holocaust and denying natural climate change?
Why go no like that when for many of us a simple external enquiry mainly by historians, engineering and statistical specialists to prove the point or disprove global warming with criminal prosecution to follow if it is shown that there was any knowing exaggeration of the effects of CO2 to promote renewable energy.
Averages cannot be used to prove or disprove climate change and individual studies of each point is really required
given that the very limited number of points means any individual point could be in or out of a local hot spot depending on weather patterns rather than any indicator of climate changes.
It does not take a great deal of effort to see this policy hugely benefits rich landowners for the installation of wind “farms” and solar “parks” paid for significantly if not mainly out of the meagre earnings of Starbucks McDonalds and similar workers.
The hypocrisy of the Guardian is astounding even the extent it bans people who are not global warming bigots from commenting while refusing to remove them from the list so they still benefit from the advertising revenue the numbers give them.
What is it about this otherwise most excellent site that makes it so difficult to vote up a contributor? I press hard and soft, up and down whilst up pop cut and paste signs and then finally, when my modest applauding gets through an angry red message ticks me off for voting twice.
The Guardian is corrupt morally and intellectually, preaching tolerance and freedom whilst brutally shutting out dissent.
“Whenever a child says “I don’t believe in fairies” there’s a little fairy somewhere that falls right down dead.”
J. M. Barrie, Peter Pan (1904)
The author of the piece in the Guardian argues that if you see no proof the Nazis tried to exterminate the Jews you are their murderer. If you do not believe in manmade global warming you promote catastrophe.
Peter Pan was fun when I was five but it is no basis for public policy. It is fairy dust.
This is really obscene. As a total Sceptic of the B.S of the CAGW politically driven nonsense, I’m delighted to say that I, in no way shape or form, do not accept the very clear and well documented evidence of the atrocities of WW2 relating to the Genocide known as the Holocaust. I am not Jewish, so I can only imagine the offence this article causes those Sceptics who are Jewish. The very people the clown who wrote this, believes he was championing their cause. Can someone be so far up their own behind? Apparently, yes they can. Disgusting. Needs to be publicly shamed for this.
In my own case, the cause for “denial”is the understanding, from five years of intensive study, that the CO2/warming mechanism is scientifically unsupportable, as Knut Angstrom correctly concluded in 1900. It was subsequently revived, from 1938 to 1964, by a British climate hobbyist who claimed, without proof, that CO2/warming “should work.” My own research agrees with the conclusion of Angstrom that no, it shouldn’t. My study did, however, confirm the likelihood of an alternative agent: monatomic chlorine from anthropogenic CFCs catalytically thinning the ozone layer and admitting UV-B to Earth’s surface. This nicely explains both the limitation of actual global warming to the 24-year period 1975 to 1998 and the persistence of elevated temperatures since 1998 (catalytic thinning of ozone). Could all this explain the unconscionable lack of experimental proof of CO2/warming in the peer-reviewed literature?
Anyone wishing to respond to this should do so using my email (davidlaing(at)aol(dot)com. I don’t monitor this site for replies.
The Guardian is suffering from REALITY DENIALISM. We live in an Ice Age and those jokers want to precipitate the abrupt end to the current Ice Age interglacial. And our Holocene is not exactly the warmest interglacial of the current Ice Age, either. Cold kills! And the last glacial period (90,000 years) left Earth so desiccated that human population could never get above 100,000, according to some estimates. I suspect our technology might help us save a few hundred million, but billions dying from the cold is what The Guardian and their ilk are unwittingly hoping for. That makes the Holocaust look like a minor mishap, with more than 1,000x as many deaths.
I don’t like alarmism. But we need to be aware of the challenges ahead and act accordingly. Pushing Global Cooling measures in an Ice Age is tantamount to suicide — like dousing your homes with gasoline to “protect” them from the coming brush fire. Reality denial writ large.