So Scott calls Al Gore "the Churchill of climate change" -- this despite the fact that the fact that Gore's science is so shoddy that a British High Court ruled that his film can't be shown to schoolchildren. I would love for this to be a bad case of a malfunctioning irony meter (mine), but I fear the worst. (Was Churchill also a shameless hypocrite?)
Then sneaky old Aaronson goes ahead and links to a something this, thus ensuring that readers like me will continue to return and wade through the standard liberal tripe for the occasional (well, ok -- frequent) gem.
[Update: Seems I've been sloppy, both in facts and in rhetoric. The above was meant as a friendly jab (didja notice the not-so-veiled compliment?) though I can see how it might be taken for an ad hominem attack. Also, as Kenny and others point out, my claim about the film not being allowed to be shown isn't accurate. See here for more information.]
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I thought the court ruled that there are 9 questionable claims (out of a feature length film) and that the film should only be shown in school if mention of those particular problems is brought up.
Post a Comment