Batman’s a Scientist July 2, 2009Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: climate change, global warming
Batman’s a Scientist
By Chris Horner
Planet Gore, July 1, 2009
Anyone with even a casual acquaintance with the global-warming industry knows that this crowd’s first response to any challenge, of any sort, from any source, is to go ad hominem. When the climate facts are not helpful, ad hom is their way to change the subject. They know what they need to know — that climate legislation is the instrument at hand for long-desired “social change,” and whatever means that are necessary will be employed. To these people, facts and logic are for losers —and often enough, ad hominem is used to conceal the ideologues’ staggering ignorance on the issues (ignorance of the sort that President Obama revealed with his recent claim that carbon dioxide “contaminate[s] the water we drink and pollute[s] the air we breathe” — he said, opening a Perrier and exhaling a sigh).
So when the EPA got caught suppressing the sole substantive report submitted as part of its “internal deliberation” over whether and how to seize the energy sector of the U.S. economy, you knew ad hominem was sure to follow. In the Washington Times story about the suppressed report, we read that a spokeswoman for EPA administrator Lisa P. Jackson — who made the determination that CO2 threatens the world — “noted that the memo’s author, Alan Carlin, is an economist, not a climate scientist.” Funny how people tasked with certain jobs become unqualified only when they are inconvenient.
Carlin is, indeed, a Ph.D. economist from MIT, a degree he obtained after earning a degree in physics from Cal Tech — both of which probably explain why he holds the job of reviewing such proposals. But this reflexive ad hom raises several obvious questions, none more obvious than: What makes Lisa P. Jackson a climate scientist? (She’s a chemical engineer.)
For that matter, who the hell are Barack Obama, Henry Waxman, Ed Markey, Nancy Pelosi, Carol Browner, Al Gore . . . need I continue? They all apparently are perfectly suited to reach informed judgment on the issue. Waxman is a scientist (bachelor’s in political science, UCLA ‘61) like Batman’s a scientist. Freeman Dyson, meanwhile, is “just a physicist.” Clearly, our governmental solons are qualified because they agree that this issue must be ridden to achieve the desired “change.”
Read the rest here