The American Spectator

Print Email

Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

It's not as if one expects actual journalism from the left-wing propagandists at Time magazine anymore, but today's article entitled "Who's Bankrolling the Climate-Change Deniers?" is particularly egregious.

Almost everything that columnist Bryan Walsh writes in his cult-like piece is wrong, but a few areas stand out in particular.

First, while Walsh repeatedly refers to a climate change denial "machine", that description implies coordination and unity -- such as actually exists in the alarmist camp. 

However, there is a much wider range of views on the side of those who are skeptical about man-made climate change than on the side of those who say the human race it at risk. Some skeptics say that the entire idea that humans strongly influence climate is a hoax. Some say that there is a human impact but it is too small to be a problem. And some even say that the impact is measurable but that the cost of "fixing" the so-called problem is simply too high. It is only on the skeptical side that there is any honest debate. It is only on the skeptical side that the true nature of science, namely that it is not determined by consensus and that it must revolve around testable and falsifiable hypotheses, is honored.

Furthermore, there has not been anything as machine-like in the history of climate science as what we learned in Climategate was going on among some alarmist scientists, but that fact conveniently escapes Mr. Walsh.

Second, Walsh demonizes a cabal of evil oil companies, business groups, and conservative think tanks whose enormous funding of "deniers" is used to cloud the minds of gullible Americans.

However, the amount of money spent by environmental groups and governments on climate alarmism dwarfs the spending by skeptics. One 2007 estimate by Senator James Inhofe (R-OK), the ranking member of the Senate Committee on the Environment and Public Works, suggests that the money spent on and by alarmists is more than two thousand times as much as that spent on and by skeptics.

Time's article reminds me of more than anything are the ramblings of a cult leader, trying to herd some drifting followers back into the fold. Proclaim doomsday, demonize those who disagree, and pose your cult as the only way to salvation, facts be damned.