TIME Magazine believes that Gore and “global warming” sermons are a great combination. That’s why their environmental doctrines are so very bizarre, I guess.
How bizarre? Try reading TIME Magazine’s “Global Warming Survival Guide” dated, April 9, 2007, and the “51 Things You Can Do to Make a Difference”.
Rule 26: “Plant a bamboo fence”, because it feels good?
Unprecedented levels of idiocy aside, there’s plenty to laugh about. Indeed, I was so moved by the weirdness of it all that I wrote to TIME:
Your comically unbalanced cover story on “global warming” reminded me of why, I, for one, am not a believer. “If droughts and wildfires, floods and crop failures … and the images of drowning polar bears didn’t quiet most of the remaining global-warming doubters,” claimed the hysterical Jeffrey Kluger, “the hurricane-drive destruction of New Orleans did”. Actually, it didn’t. Many scientists have said to blame Hurricane Katrina on global warming is absurd. In Australia’s case, we have had more devastating droughts before. As for “wildfires”, these have more to do with arson than global warming. Could TIME please consider the other side of the story?
My letter, to the editor’s credit, appeared in TIME’s Inbox section under the subheading “Global Hysterics?”
But what really made me laugh was the fact I had to remove my magazine from its plastic wrapper to read the damn thing. (States Rule 24: “Just say no to plastic bags”.)
Meanwhile even the politicised United Nations freely concedes crop harvests are booming. Just analyse the satellite images. TIME must employ lazy reporters.
Allowing the public to question “man made global warming” is often discouraged, and for good reason. Why admit you’re wrong when you can make money from scaring Sunday School children? Global warming is the new hell on earth.
Most dramatically, the “discovery” of drowning polar bears is cited as “proof” that the end is nigh. This ignores the fact that some habitats are growing colder. Instead bury the truth that polar bears can swim, or there is a “problem” with thriving populations. Instead embrace hysteria.
“Al Gore offered a computer-generated bear flailing about for icy salvation in his movie,” writes Christopher C. Horner in the witty Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming. True. “Claims of the imperiled polar bear run the gamut, from drowning in water to which they are unaccustomed (not true, they encounter it every summer), to starvation induced cannibalism,” as one sensational Associate Press report breathlessly announced.
For argument’s sake, let’s say the polar bear is drowning in the “warm” seas. Wouldn’t reason suggest that an autopsy is in order? Doesn’t science ask us to question, and verify? Or, do we embrace wild conclusions because we “feel” there was a magical “climate stability” age in the pre-Cinderella period?
Discuss in our Forums
See what other readers are saying about this article!
Click here to read & post comments.
27 posts so far.