From the pen of Mona Charen
Mona Charen writes,
It’s Freudian: The Viennese analyst taught that if you say you hate your mother, you hate your mother. And if you say you love your mother, you are in denial about hating your mother. Climate change believers are like Freudians. If the weather is warm, it’s proof of global warming. But if the weather is cool, this, too, is evidence of the sinister tricks global warming can play.
These words earn Miss Charen the Economic Nationalist’s extremely sporadically awarded recognition as Quote of the Week.
(For the record, the Economic Nationalist has never taken a position on the proposition that mankind were threatened by man-made global warming.)
December 9th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
It’s why they started calling it “Climate Change.” Because nothing changes like the weather, they could blame it on us, and then crush us in punishment.
December 9th, 2009 at 9:25 pm
Well, Howard, I sorry to hear that you have slow to take a position on this matter. It has been rather clear to me from the beginning that it was all a fraud. The very people who were plugging the idea were hugely invested in the idea — they stood to make gobs of money — and yet their own behavior demonstrated their clear disbelief in what they were pushing.
Algore is the prime example of this. He set himself up to make a bundle selling “carbon credits,” and yet he lives in a super-size mansion, and consumes as much power as a medium size city. This just does not look like the actions of a person who is real sincere about AGW. In my thinking, it just fairly screams fraud, especially when coupled with the fact that the man is a know-nothing.
I have been enjoying the release of the materials from CRU at UEA no little bit. I do hope that those folks are so thoroughly discredited that they cannot find work at any think more than MickeyD’s — the smokey part cooking burgers.
December 9th, 2009 at 11:13 pm
Like all of Ms. Charen’s articles, her arguments tell us far more about her than it does about the people she constantly misrepresents in her articles. In this case she’s projecting the common meme within the world of denialism unto scientific literates.
We understand the difference between weather and climate, primarily because we’ve been forced to become experts at explaining ENSO cycles to denialists who relentlessly look to a particular weather pattern in their small part of the globe to “disprove” the findings of climatologists.
While there are certainly some ideologues who advocate that AGW is happening merely because it fits nicely with their political ideology and we suffer with an assortment of non-scientific advocacy leaders who engage in hyperbole regarding AGW’s predicted effects; looking to weather to extrapolate a position on AGW is not a defining attribute of those who invested the time to study what science understands regarding our climate. It is for the average Joe on the street denialist.
December 10th, 2009 at 3:00 pm
Regrettably, ol’ Axe is probably right.
Dr.D: Like you, I strongly suspect that the leftists thronging Carbonhagen this week are up to no good. Maybe unlike you, however, I do find the basic carbon-induced global-warming hypothesis plausible. I am no geologist—professional, amateur or otherwise—but one doubts that the climate question answered to politics. The climate question answers rather to geology, and answers nonetheless to geology even when some of the geologists involved are revealed as frauds.
Mr. (Dr.?) Heath: The businesslike tone of your remark does not invite informality. Without premeditated design, however, this blog’s remark-columns have grown used to letting folks give people actually present in the discussion their first names, so I hope that you will not take further address as Michael amiss. Regarding your cogent remark, I have nothing to add other than my thanks for the perspective. One suspects that you know rather more about the geology in question than I do.
December 11th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
As a side note, I would observe that too few conservatives seem uncomfortable with the fact that the Climategate e-mails were stolen.
Now, the theft is done. The public, conservative and otherwise, cannot be asked to ignore what it now knows. Fair play and privacy however have been offended nonetheless.
A few may persuade themselves that liars were not entitled to fair play and privacy. If so, let them take care. The old, totalitarian argument, “Who has nothing to hide, has nothing to fear,” is an argument Anglo-Saxon conservatives have never admitted. We are not about to begin admitting it now.
Howard
December 14th, 2009 at 11:47 pm
It never bothered me that Solzhenitsyn wrote illegally.
December 15th, 2009 at 6:44 pm
But now that you think about it, Axe Head, are you still not bothered by it, or surely Howard has persuaded you that this is a matter of grave concern?