Obviously, all you Alarmists and Deniers are causing great stress to the debate, so there is a great need to get the debate back on track to…a total belief in anthropogenic Hotcoldwetdry. Here’s Mark Lynas at the UK Guardian (which has totally gone all in on being the Official Paper Of Record for the Cult of Climastrology)
We must reclaim the climate change debate from the political extremes
Alarmists and deniers need to climb out of their parallel trenches, engage with the developing world and work together to end the crisisClimate change is real, caused almost entirely by humans, and presents a potentially existential threat to human civilisation. Solving climate change does not mean rolling back capitalism, suspending the free market or stopping economic growth.
With those two rather innocuous statements, I have just alienated most people on either side of the climate debate. Today, climate change is no longer just a scientific or an energy problem. Instead, one’s position on global warming has become a badge of political identity in a debate riven by ideological and tribal conflicts. This bodes ill for humanity’s chances of addressing the threat before it is too late. (snip)
This (the belief that all weather events are caused by Mankind) isn’t science; it is politics. The science – as articulated by the IPPC – says the warming of the climate system is “unequivocalâ€, that the last 30 years were probably the warmest for the last 1,500 years, and that it is “extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th centuryâ€. (snip)
We should all be able to agree on this. But we can’t, because this scientific narrative seems to have been captured by one, rather extreme, end of the political spectrum.
Got that? You aren’t allowed to disagree with the Cult Of Climastrology (CoC), but, hey, also ignore the nutbags who hold the same beliefs. What Mr. Lynas is attempting to do is move the Cult back to sounding more mainstream with a disassociation of the more extreme elements of the CoC, like Naomi Klein, who has made the Big Mistake for the CoC of actually writing about what the true goals of the CoC are.
But to make any of this happen we will need to recapture the climate debate from the political extremes. We must then work to come up with inclusive proposals that can form the basis of a social consensus that must last decades if it is to have any meaningful effect on the climate change crisis that faces us.
For all you Skeptics, this means shutting the hell up and following along.
