I don't blame him. Many people have been taken with this idea. Prime Minister Harper included. Even the title of his article doesn't make sense. "Bad science: Global-warming deniers are a liability to the conservative cause."
Our top Conservative Stephen Harper, who is also a personal hero of mine, has already stated that he has deferred to the authority of the consensus on Global Warming. Does that mean that I have to be in lockstep with everything the CPC says and does? Skeptical bloggers are strength not a liability. We are no Zombies. If you want a homogenized collective view you might want to go someplace else. Though I may love and support the CPC in any way I can, they have no power over me and I have no power over them.
Let's look at the article. He starts by making light of skeptics with a sarcastic opening paragraph that actually has some links to good articles. (thank you) One is from the US Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works titled "Climate Momentum Shifting: Prominent Scientists Reverse Belief in Man-made Global Warming - Now Skeptics." The other is the text of a speech given by the chairman of an Australian news network. The first one is totally credible with direct quotes and links to back it all up. The second article is opinion, much like my opinion and having the same value as Jonathan Kay's opinion.
Kay dismisses it all with the words: "Fine-sounding rhetoric — but all of it nonsense." Really. Lord Moncton said it best but let me paraphrase: You are not qualified to disqualify a skeptic. Like so many warmists, including the Prime Minister himself, Jonathan Kay's argument boils down to the argument from authority. Learned people said so and therefore it is. No thinking required and if you do think about it you must think as you are told or you are wrong.
Kay kindly included his authority with this link. Its not very new, its been sitting around ignored for many months. You will never guess who the author is? Stephen Schneider.
The same guy who was behind the Global Cooling scare. He's even moved on from Global Warming now. The article refers to ACC or Anthropogenic Climate Change. Mr. Schneider may jump from one apocalypse to another but the policy solution is always the same. Taxes, large government, and socialism in general.
Kay then slips into the old smear calling skeptics deniers. "Militantly right-wing blogs and other Internet echo chambers populated entirely by other deniers," are the only places where skeptics are found. Never mind that he has a good blog in these same awful echo chambers.
The slur "denier" is a nasty attempt from the old days of Global Warming arrogance that tried to paint skeptics as tantamount to holocaust deniers. Many careers were ruined by that kind of smear (ask Climate Ph.D.Tim Ball). For an otherwise good writer I have to say I'm disappointed with Jonathan Kay. Please stop using that word. Warmist is a reminder that you all went crazy about warming for while and now you are just crazy about any kind of weather. Denier is linked to racist ignorance and we ask you to stop.
This Paragraph has to be fully reproduced:
"This is a phenomenon that should worry not only environmentalists, but also conservatives themselves: The conviction that global warming is some sort of giant intellectual fraud now has become a leading bullet point within mainstream North American conservatism; and so has come to bathe the whole movement in its increasingly crankish, conspiratorial glow."
There are indeed well funded institutions that exist only to push this idea and policy based on it. This is not a conspiracy. Its not a secret. Its all out in the open. What do you call a conspiracy that is right out in the open? A movement?
The IPCC is a prime example. Is it possible that the IPCC could ever find itself in error? Woops, um we wasted all that money and got everyone worked up over a mistake. Not likely. I don't think anyone ever called it a conspiracy in the first place. No, its a megameme. Once you buy in you don't see alternative explanations any longer.
Of course they will portray us as cranks. They portray us as racists and bible thumpers, and buck toothed baptist inbred hill billies too. They will always do this and Jonathan only helps. He says here, "Impressionable conservatives who lack the numeracy skills to perform long division or balance their checkbooks feel entitled to spew elaborate proofs purporting to demonstrate how global warming is in fact caused by sunspots."
That is so weird. These last couple of years have been so hard my own check book. My 2nd business failed. I'm sure I'm not the only one but they say that entrepreneurs usually fail a couple of times before they get it right. I suppose this means I must be wrong about everything. I suppose this means Global Warming is true because my checkbook went red for a while. Numeracy huh? Here's some numbers for you 3.8 GPA overall, magna cum laude. I could be a Climate Scientist If I chose to be one. I didn't. Do not assume that I don't understand the science because I don't agree with 97% of the AGW stakeholders.
Reality is not a democracy anyway. There is one independent truth that does not change on the votes of a climate club. Consensus is not science. We know it and they know it.