quote:
Well, this certainly has gotten Think Progress’s panties in a twist. They’re squealing like a stuck pig. [emphasis added, it's a link see below]The italicized "this" led me to a serious of links which got me to this editorial (discover.com), which was intriguing in its own way. It starts out with something that supposedly is in the web, which I haven't heard of before. It is called "Poe's Law". So, what's this "law". I'll quote it here:
Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humor, it is utterly impossible to parody a Creationist in such a way that someone won't mistake it for the genuine article. [The law caught on and has since slowly leaked out as an Internet meme. Over time it has been extended to include not just creationist parody but any parody of extreme ideology, whether religious, secular, or totally bonkers.]
Back to discover article-- It says the following about the law--
Creating an actual billboard like this would be taking Poe’s Law and aiming right between your own eyes!
Hmm! Quite the statement that. I get the impression here that Heartland was flinging holy water at the devil and the devil is screaming bloody murder. What is so intriguing is that the "warmists" think they are doing the same thing and that was Heartland's "desperate" response! What I am postulating here is a type of mutual projection. They both think of each other as being evil and are trying to bring down the existing order.
So, what's going on here? If I may, I think it is a result of "churches" doing their thing. But these aren't real churches, you say? No, but the arguments are like ones you might get in a debate between the ayatollah and the Pope about the Trinity. It has become so deeply an article of faith that it is impossible to have a rational discussion on the issue. Indeed, deeply held belief in general may just preempt any discussion of a scientific matter. I take Heartland's side here, sort of, because it is not a religious matter, but a scientific matter. It is not a matter that should involve deeply held beliefs. That's what the advocates of human caused climate change have turned this into.
If carbon dioxide is such a problem, why not come up with something that works that may fix the "problem"?
Instead of that, what we may end up with is an excuse the grow the influence of the government, which is the real question as far as I'm concerned. So, what exactly is everyone arguing about? Bigger government or the environment?
A better response for Heartland is to advocate for solutions that actually work economically and technologically. These won't necessitate a larger government and may even make us more prosperous. This is supposedly the idea of "green jobs", but they haven't delivered.
Deliver the real jobs and hearts and minds will follow.
No comments:
Post a Comment