Perspective – Bitchy climatologists v Pederast priests
Posted by Dave Bath on 2010-02-21
Climate-action denialists try to pull down the edifice of climatology because of a few bitchy emails between competitive scientists, and a single error (but hardly a fundamental one that invalidates all other data) in a huge report.
It is a pity that the even more damning, more evil, universally recognized, and self-admitted phenomenon of pederast priests, which belies the claims that Xtianity leads to improved behaviour of individuals, doesn’t cause those climate-action denialists to demand that those organizations who have protected pederasts, or at least, despite supposedly intensive training been unable to make them decent people, be pulled down, be given no special protected status within civilized societies.
Why is that?
Perhaps because... both denying the need for climate action and denying the parasitical (at best) nature of pederast-harboring churches within society both require looking for, and correctly evaluating evidence, and taking logical steps to protect society in the long term.
How does a millenium or two of pederasty endemic within an organization compare to a few narky emails and an error tracking down the provenance about assertion of glacier melting rates?
I wonder if climate-action denialists have a higher proportion of "strongly faithful" among them than the general population. I'd especially be interested to know any differences in religious affiliation (or not) between the two positions on climate change in scientists generally, and climatologists in particular.