The American Spectator

Print Email

Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

Camille Paglia does another one of her occassional Salon Q&A sessions and takes another righteous whack at the man-made catastrophic global warming consensus:

The simplest facts about geology seem to be missing from the mental equipment of many highly educated people these days. There is far too much credulity placed in fancy-pants, speculative computer modeling about future climate change. Furthermore, hand-wringing media reports about hotter temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere are rarely balanced by acknowledgment of the recent cold waves in South Africa and Australia, the most severe in 30 years.

Where are the intellectuals in this massive attack of groupthink? Inert, passive and cowardly, the lot of them. True intellectuals would be alarmed and repelled by the heavy fog of dogma that now hangs over the debate about climate change. More skeptical voices need to be heard. Why are liberals abandoning this issue to the right wing, which is successfully using it to contrast conservative rationality with liberal emotionalism? The environmental movement, whose roots are in nature-worshipping Romanticism, is vitally important to humanity, but it can only be undermined by rampant propaganda and half-truths.

The again, the right-wing seems eager to abandon the fight as well, if for no other reason than to avoid derision that rivals even that towards opposition toward S-CHIP expansion.

Also: How "nature-worshiping Romanticism" can be separated from "emotionalism" might be an interesting query for her next session.

topics:
Environment, Global Warming, Africa