Some environmentalists and commentators have suggested that global-warming “denial” be made a crime, much as Holocaust denial is in some countries. Others have proposed that climate-change dissidents be prosecuted in Nuremberg-style trials. The Weather Channel’s Heidi Cullen has suggested that television meteorologists be stripped of their American Meteorological Society certification if they dare to question predictions of catastrophic global warming.
Boston Globe, Hot tempers on global warming
Not being a denialist myself, yuo understand, just wondering at the crazed intolerence of some people. Making a criminal of Freeman Dyson, Professor of Physics at the Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton seems a little harsh:
My first heresy says that all the fuss about global warming is grossly exaggerated
One Comment
Few dare to believe Global Few dare to believe Global Warming isn’t real, but the sad part is fewer dare to admit it.
Personally I’ll go with what the scientists say rather than the environmentalists. Most of them say global warming is real, so that’s good enough for me.
I believe science may have an agenda, or rather individual scientists may. That is a key difference between them and environmentalists I’m afraid.
All environmentalists have an agenda, however well meaning this may be.
Frankly I’d rather have the facts.
Oh, and while we’re at it I’m beginning to come around to the idea of (correctly monitored and licenced) GM crops.
Then again, I believe Rachel Carson (author of Silent Spring) is a far more prolific murderer than Hitler and the Nazi movement, Pol Pot and others - probably combined.
Still, at least she had good intentions…. right?