Some Comments on Global Warming Denial

I am writing at lot about global warming denial at the moment - because the fucking idiots involved in denial are fucking idiots. Either they know such a paltry amount about climate science that they should concentrate on getting a GCSE in geography before lecturing people with PhDs - or they are paid shills spouting what they know is rubbish in exchange for a quick buck, but at the expence of their (and our) own biosphere. Fucking. Idiots.

And I'm not going to be polite about it.

Take the example of the prime fucking idiot fucking jibberjabber of Christopher Monkton, 3rd Viscount Monckton of Fuckwittington. This guy is not a scientist and knows fuck-all about science. Yet he writes and is cited on the subject - admittedly by fuckwit publications like the Telegraph.

Yet, and yet, he get invited to speak on a subject he knows fuck all about. Want a clue as to how much of a massive cock this guy is? Check the open letter he produced to McCain during the US elections. It's got a lovely italicised font and a smart looking heraldry shield. It looks like an overpuffed scroll of buffonery. And the contents? jibberajbbery of the lowest calibre;

His contribution to the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report in 2007 - the correction of a table inserted by IPCC bureaucrats that had overstated tenfold the observed contribution of the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets to sea-level rise - earned him the status of Nobel Peace Laureate.

He's a Laureate? For adding some comments to the IPCC report? Yeah and I'm the 4th Viscount of Fucking Brenchley.

Anyway a couple of interesting snippits. One of the denialist think-tanks agreed that the (blindingly obvious) reason the denialists deny the science is simply ideology;

Dr Benny Peiser, director of Lawson’s sceptic PR outfit, the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF), agrees that many on the sceptic and denial side of the global warming debate are politically motivated. They oppose many policy measures being proposed to tackle global warming on ideological grounds and that is why they attack the science. “I think that’s a fair observation, at least for many,”

No shit. And this snippit that suggests that, far from getting stronger, the denialists are at a last gasp...

It is tempting to see all this as a rise in sceptical thinking as the world contemplates the economic consequences of massive cuts in its carbon emissions. But that is too simplistic, says Bob Ward, communications and policy director at the Grantham Research Institute at the London School of Economics, which is headed by Lord Stern. "I don't think there's been a rise in scepticism," he said. "All that's happening is that the sceptics are now down to a small enough group that they are able to band together and gloss over their differences."

-