"If those climate alarmists who went after me ... had any honor, they would not just apologize, but feel some guilt for being associated with the religion of climate change..."Ross Kaminsky at the American Spectator reacts to the news that Peter Gleick, well-known scientist and AGW activist, has admitted to committing identity theft in order to steal documents.
Here is my question: to what, if indeed any, principles of ethical proscription do these people submit? To put it another way: if they could get away with it, is there anything these people would not do to their critics?
On Gleick himself... it should be noted that whilst this episode is certainly not a "tragedy" as the New York Times' Andrew Revkin preposterously supposes, it is however, a shame: Gleick rose to prominence within the broader "climate science community" for his research on water and hydrological basins - a consequential subject entirely appropriate to scientific study. Yet his resort to fraud is, in my view, characteristic of many of those people who have been screaming for the still further expansion of government in the perverse name of caution.
To exemplify that last point about character, I remind readers yet again as to why I am banned at Michael Turton's blog and also of the lie he subsequently told as to the reason why he banned me.
Remember, this is who these people are: the Left, as revealed by their own hand.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comment moderation is now in place, as of April 2012. Rules:
1) Be aware that your right to say what you want is circumscribed by my right of ownership here.
2) Make your comments relevant to the post to which they are attached.
3) Be careful what you presume: always be prepared to evince your point with logic and/or facts.
4) Do not transgress Blogger's rules regarding content, i.e. do not express hatred for other people on account of their ethnicity, age, gender, sexual orientation or nationality.
5) Remember that only the best are prepared to concede, and only the worst are prepared to smear.