Poli-Grip
Good piece in The New York Times (because it agrees with me) about the politicization of science. The Left often thinks because the Right lets their agenda get in the way of their science, that they, the Left, in their opposition, are being objective. In fact, they also use science to support their political preferences.
I was going to describe the article in greater detail, but you can read it yourself, and in the interests of equal time, here's a slam that the author must think is pretty good, but seems to miss the point to me.
posted by LAGuy @ 12:21 AM
2 Comments:
Wow... I browsed that Climate Progress site, and it's terrifying. Among other things, they use the noun "denier" (often unadorned) to refer to those who
In the Catholic Church, heresy is defined as "the obstinate denial or obstinate doubt after the reception of baptism of some truth which is to be believed by divine and Catholic faith" (Code of Canon Law, c. 751). It seems these environmentalists hold to an even stricter stnadard. They label Charles Krauthammer a "denier" for this column, which I would characterize as "doubt", not "denial" -- and indeed not "obstinate doubt", since he calls for more research to determine the facts about global warming.
They also are furious at the Washington Post and the NYTimes for allowing these columns to be printed. Again, this is amazing to me. I know many conservatives who consider the Times and the Post to be liberally biased in their coverage and in their editorials, and have complained about this frequently. But offhand I don't recall any conservatives who objected to the Times or the Post printing a signed op-ed piece that presented a liberal view. I guess carbon rationing trumps freedom of the press?
(my first sentence wasn't finished but you can figure it out.)
I especially love their description of George Will's column as a "collection of error-filled denier talking points [redundant]". Is it redundant because all Deniers are in Error? Or is it redundant because all Deniers can express themselves in no manner except by means of Talking Points?
Post a Comment
<< Home