<![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for On climate denialists and Nuremberg]]> Grist Comment Feed en Comment #1 by tomsyl http://www.grist.org/article/on-climate-denialists-and-nuremberg/ Thu, 12 Oct 2006 07:43:59 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/on-climate-denialists-and-nuremberg/1 Good on ya

for withdrawing the "Nuremberg" comment.  In fact, I initially logged on just to send you a nasty-gram about how useless and credibility-destroying Nazi name-calling is.  Nice self-correction and direction towards a rational discussion.

]]> Good on ya

for withdrawing the "Nuremberg" comment.  In fact, I initially logged on just to send you a nasty-gram about how useless and credibility-destroying Nazi name-calling is.  Nice self-correction and direction towards a rational discussion.

]]> Comment #2 by bhglitter http://www.grist.org/article/on-climate-denialists-and-nuremberg/ Thu, 12 Oct 2006 14:23:46 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/on-climate-denialists-and-nuremberg/2 On Moral Equivalency

I'm curious if any of the same people who are in an uproar over the moral equivalency implied by your use of Nuremberg take similar issue with the comparison of abortion to the holocaust put forth by the Genocide Awareness Project -- a display that implicitly compares women who have abortions to the Nazi regime. Now, I don't mean to paint with a broad brush, but given the Drudge Report's role in your statement's initial publicity, it's likely that many people expressing their outrage are part of the conservative movement. There is certainly a cross-section of political interest between "climate denialists" and the Christianist movement, as Andrew Sullivan would call it. At the very least both sides have a very real political interest in rejecting scientific consensus, an objective that kind of binds them to the general conservative movement.

Basically, I wouldn't be surprised if some them aren't exactly consistent with their own moral equivalency. Pot kettle black and all that.

There probably are a lot of people out there legitimately offended by the word choice of your comparison, and I agree that it was inexact and inappropriate, but it's certainly nothing that should be held to demonize you. Especially when your larger point, at least the one that I think you were making, has some real validity - mainly that if the projections about the impact of climate change bear out, then there is bound to be future public inquiry into who or what bears moral culpability for the grave negative effects.

]]> On Moral Equivalency

I'm curious if any of the same people who are in an uproar over the moral equivalency implied by your use of Nuremberg take similar issue with the comparison of abortion to the holocaust put forth by the Genocide Awareness Project -- a display that implicitly compares women who have abortions to the Nazi regime. Now, I don't mean to paint with a broad brush, but given the Drudge Report's role in your statement's initial publicity, it's likely that many people expressing their outrage are part of the conservative movement. There is certainly a cross-section of political interest between "climate denialists" and the Christianist movement, as Andrew Sullivan would call it. At the very least both sides have a very real political interest in rejecting scientific consensus, an objective that kind of binds them to the general conservative movement.

Basically, I wouldn't be surprised if some them aren't exactly consistent with their own moral equivalency. Pot kettle black and all that.

There probably are a lot of people out there legitimately offended by the word choice of your comparison, and I agree that it was inexact and inappropriate, but it's certainly nothing that should be held to demonize you. Especially when your larger point, at least the one that I think you were making, has some real validity - mainly that if the projections about the impact of climate change bear out, then there is bound to be future public inquiry into who or what bears moral culpability for the grave negative effects.

]]> Comment #3 by Lost Socks http://www.grist.org/article/on-climate-denialists-and-nuremberg/ Fri, 13 Oct 2006 03:10:42 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/on-climate-denialists-and-nuremberg/3 Nuremburg trials?

When these types of draconian options are considered, means the ideas are losing ground. The ever so veiled attempt to link the holocaust with those who do not support the idea that humans are responsible for global warming is a sad testament to your own intolerance and just how out of touch you really are.

The simple truth is there is not nearly enough evidence to show that human activity has caused this so called global warming. It may have added to it, but the behavior of environmentalist is far out of line with evidence. The global climate is wildly unpredictable. And to want to put people on trial for a system that is so incompletely understood is insane.

]]> Nuremburg trials?

When these types of draconian options are considered, means the ideas are losing ground. The ever so veiled attempt to link the holocaust with those who do not support the idea that humans are responsible for global warming is a sad testament to your own intolerance and just how out of touch you really are.

The simple truth is there is not nearly enough evidence to show that human activity has caused this so called global warming. It may have added to it, but the behavior of environmentalist is far out of line with evidence. The global climate is wildly unpredictable. And to want to put people on trial for a system that is so incompletely understood is insane.

]]> Comment #4 by MarchDancer http://www.grist.org/article/on-climate-denialists-and-nuremberg/ Tue, 17 Oct 2006 02:10:36 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/on-climate-denialists-and-nuremberg/4 Global Warming - Not Happening?

I dislike being political in these forums, but there is a large segment of one party that is attempting to deny the exitence of global warming. After all, it heated up in the Middle Ages, too! All of the intelligent people who can remind the disclaimers that was a very localized warming trend will not be listened to. They don't wish to be dissuaded.

And while Nuremburg and Nazism (thank you for the apology leading to a discussion) are not an apt description, I do believe that there will be a recconing when the Truth is finally accepted as "The Way It Is". Mostly? I think they'll be remembered as stupid and blind to the facts.

That should be enough of a deterrent for anyone who values his legacy. The light will dawn very quickly when that threat is recognized and we'll see some very fancy back-pedaling.

In Peace, Harmony and Unity may we find ways to work together to meet our common goal - the health of our earthly Home.

]]> Global Warming - Not Happening?

I dislike being political in these forums, but there is a large segment of one party that is attempting to deny the exitence of global warming. After all, it heated up in the Middle Ages, too! All of the intelligent people who can remind the disclaimers that was a very localized warming trend will not be listened to. They don't wish to be dissuaded.

And while Nuremburg and Nazism (thank you for the apology leading to a discussion) are not an apt description, I do believe that there will be a recconing when the Truth is finally accepted as "The Way It Is". Mostly? I think they'll be remembered as stupid and blind to the facts.

That should be enough of a deterrent for anyone who values his legacy. The light will dawn very quickly when that threat is recognized and we'll see some very fancy back-pedaling.

In Peace, Harmony and Unity may we find ways to work together to meet our common goal - the health of our earthly Home.

]]>