Rod Liddle

Apologies to Wily Seacole Trout and others. But……

Apologies to Wily Seacole Trout and others. But……
Text settings
Comments

Delingpole Redux. James has responded to my post in his blog to all those true and fervent non-believers at the Telegraph. The headline reads “Rod Liddle Knows Less About Climate Change Than I know About Millwall”. And there, just about, we have it – as I said, the political correctness of the right, mirroring the political correctness of the left.

I don’t know how much JD knows about Millwall. But clearly, having spent more than a year blogging about global warming being a hoax, JD seems to believe he is in receipt of an honorary Phd in non-climate change, presumably a starred first. He is, without question, an unchallengeable expert. And, just like those AGW experts who insist that because the rest of us haven’t done a two term course module in climate change at the UEA we’re not qualified to speak on the subject, so we get James’s response; I’m not qualified to speak either, because I haven’t been blogging about it for ages and ages - only occasionally. And exactly the same process is at work in each case, from the pro AGW scientists and from James; self interest, self aggrandisement and utter, unwavering certitude – this latter an uncomfortable disposition when you’re dealing with a scientific subject, although in fairness hardly unheard of.

Well, for sure, I haven’t immersed myself in anti-AGW propaganda for a year or so, buttressed by the evident chicanery of the AGW industry. I suspect that in terms of a scientific background I am probably a tad more qualified than James, on the stats at least. But that ain’t the point. If you were following the climate change arguments hither and thither for a year or so my guess is you’d think, uh-oh, this latest research paper slightly confirms the thesis that AGW is a fact, and then but look here, this report points up flaws in the argument. But we get none of that from James; it’s all no; everything he sees suggests no. No no no. Nothing for JD and those like him will ever confirm AGW, will not be allowed to. It is blind faith, just as it is blind faith with the other side, and where the facts become secondary to the conviction. And those who disagree aren’t qualified to comment.

Different subject tomorrow, I promise…………