It's called "sophistry," "unsound or misleading but clever, plausible, and subtle argument or reasoning" and it fits Rex Murphy to a T. Anyone who has heard or read this devout contrarian go on about the "theory" of global warming will know that no amount of scientific study will ever inform his tightly locked mind on this subject.
Murphy routinely ridicules the scientific community, the IPCC, environmentalists and anyone else calling for action to arrest man-made greenhouse gas emissions and, curiously, as the science builds his skepticism never truly recedes. For Rex Murphy there is no reality tipping point. He is the hi-brow Rush Limbaugh or Ann Coulter of anthropogenic global warming.
Here are excerpts from Murphy's latest adventure into denial and deceit from the Globe & Mail:
"I am under no illusion about the force of the global warming consensus.
It is the grand orthodoxy of our day. Among right-thinking people, the idea of expressing any doubts on some of its more cataclysmic projections, to speak in tones other than those of veneration about its high-priests, such as Mr. Suzuki or Al Gore, is to stir a response uncomfortably close to what in previous and less rational times was reserved for blasphemers, heretics and atheists."
(ah, nice try, Rex. Set yourself up as the latter day Galileo. There was a difference, Rex. Galileo sought to advance science, you seek to ridicule it, not with any reference to contrary science, but with the power of empty rhetoric. Just like your mentors, Ann and Rush.)
"But wherever we are on global warming, and on the models and theories supporting it, it is not yet The Truth, nor is it yet Science (with a capital S) as such. And to put a stay on our full consent to its more clamorous and particular alarms is not, pace Dr. Suzuki, either “ignoring science” or complicity in criminal endeavour. Nor is reasoned dissent or dispute, on some or all of the policy recommendations that global warming advocates insist flow, as night follows day, from their science."
(nice, Rex. Yes, anthropogenic global warming is a scientific theory. Gravity and evolution are also theories. Since gravity is a theory, Rex, maybe you would like to see how well your 767 flies when the wings fall off at 35,000 feet. Theories sometimes kill, Rex, and, until you come up with some meaningful science of your own, it's best to bear that in mind.
Here Murphy sets himself up as a voice of "reasoned dissent" while providing no reason, no justification, no explanation. A misleading and superficial argument typical of this clown.)
"It's worth pausing on this point. What global warming is, what portion of it is man-made, is one set of questions properly within the circle of rational inquiry we call science. What to do about it – shut down the oil sands, impose a carbon tax, sign on to Kyoto, mandate efficient light bulbs or hybrid cars – are choices within a range of public policy that have to be made outside any laboratory whatsoever. Global warming's more fulminating spokespeople are apt to finesse that great chasm between the science and the politics. They are further apt to imply a continuum between the unassailable authority of real and neutral science and their own particular policy prescriptions. (I notice that late in the week that something called Environmental Defence has hailed the Alberta oil sands as “the most destructive project on Earth.” It goes on to say that “your desire to tackle global warming is being held hostage by the Tar Sands.”
If global warming is primarily a “man-made” phenomenon, then what to do about it is a political discussion before it is anything else at all."
(Fair enough but, again, misleading and superficial. This is a scientific issue and, while remedial actions fall within the political realm, the "discussion" needs to be informed by science. Rex, quite craftily, avoids drawing the essential link. Going to war is, likewise, a political decision but it's always best if the politicians are first properly informed by their military chiefs. Look what happened in Iraq when Bush refused to listen to his top general, Eric Shinseki. Same idea, Rex.
Since when is the issue whether "global warming is primarily a man-made phenomenon"? Man is certainly a critical source of GHG emissions but which is the "primary" source is irrelevant. See how cheesy T-Rex can get when he slips irrelevant and misleading considerations into his arguments?)
"If Environmental Defence or Dr. Suzuki thinks shutting down the oil sands is not a political choice, I advise both the group and the man to visit Alberta and acquaint themselves, while they are at it, with the history of the national energy program – and what its consequences were for the West and Confederation.
Shutting down the oil sands would make the storm over the NEP feel like a soft rain on a sultry day by comparison. It would break the Confederation."
("Break confederation?" Why, because you say so Rex? Nothing to see here, move along, eh? So, what's the alternative, Rex, give up? Just ignore it? Oh, that's right, Rex doesn't come up with alternatives or factual responses. He doesn't have to. He's T-Rex.)
Murphy routinely ridicules the scientific community, the IPCC, environmentalists and anyone else calling for action to arrest man-made greenhouse gas emissions and, curiously, as the science builds his skepticism never truly recedes. For Rex Murphy there is no reality tipping point. He is the hi-brow Rush Limbaugh or Ann Coulter of anthropogenic global warming.
Here are excerpts from Murphy's latest adventure into denial and deceit from the Globe & Mail:
"I am under no illusion about the force of the global warming consensus.
It is the grand orthodoxy of our day. Among right-thinking people, the idea of expressing any doubts on some of its more cataclysmic projections, to speak in tones other than those of veneration about its high-priests, such as Mr. Suzuki or Al Gore, is to stir a response uncomfortably close to what in previous and less rational times was reserved for blasphemers, heretics and atheists."
(ah, nice try, Rex. Set yourself up as the latter day Galileo. There was a difference, Rex. Galileo sought to advance science, you seek to ridicule it, not with any reference to contrary science, but with the power of empty rhetoric. Just like your mentors, Ann and Rush.)
"But wherever we are on global warming, and on the models and theories supporting it, it is not yet The Truth, nor is it yet Science (with a capital S) as such. And to put a stay on our full consent to its more clamorous and particular alarms is not, pace Dr. Suzuki, either “ignoring science” or complicity in criminal endeavour. Nor is reasoned dissent or dispute, on some or all of the policy recommendations that global warming advocates insist flow, as night follows day, from their science."
(nice, Rex. Yes, anthropogenic global warming is a scientific theory. Gravity and evolution are also theories. Since gravity is a theory, Rex, maybe you would like to see how well your 767 flies when the wings fall off at 35,000 feet. Theories sometimes kill, Rex, and, until you come up with some meaningful science of your own, it's best to bear that in mind.
Here Murphy sets himself up as a voice of "reasoned dissent" while providing no reason, no justification, no explanation. A misleading and superficial argument typical of this clown.)
"It's worth pausing on this point. What global warming is, what portion of it is man-made, is one set of questions properly within the circle of rational inquiry we call science. What to do about it – shut down the oil sands, impose a carbon tax, sign on to Kyoto, mandate efficient light bulbs or hybrid cars – are choices within a range of public policy that have to be made outside any laboratory whatsoever. Global warming's more fulminating spokespeople are apt to finesse that great chasm between the science and the politics. They are further apt to imply a continuum between the unassailable authority of real and neutral science and their own particular policy prescriptions. (I notice that late in the week that something called Environmental Defence has hailed the Alberta oil sands as “the most destructive project on Earth.” It goes on to say that “your desire to tackle global warming is being held hostage by the Tar Sands.”
If global warming is primarily a “man-made” phenomenon, then what to do about it is a political discussion before it is anything else at all."
(Fair enough but, again, misleading and superficial. This is a scientific issue and, while remedial actions fall within the political realm, the "discussion" needs to be informed by science. Rex, quite craftily, avoids drawing the essential link. Going to war is, likewise, a political decision but it's always best if the politicians are first properly informed by their military chiefs. Look what happened in Iraq when Bush refused to listen to his top general, Eric Shinseki. Same idea, Rex.
Since when is the issue whether "global warming is primarily a man-made phenomenon"? Man is certainly a critical source of GHG emissions but which is the "primary" source is irrelevant. See how cheesy T-Rex can get when he slips irrelevant and misleading considerations into his arguments?)
"If Environmental Defence or Dr. Suzuki thinks shutting down the oil sands is not a political choice, I advise both the group and the man to visit Alberta and acquaint themselves, while they are at it, with the history of the national energy program – and what its consequences were for the West and Confederation.
Shutting down the oil sands would make the storm over the NEP feel like a soft rain on a sultry day by comparison. It would break the Confederation."
("Break confederation?" Why, because you say so Rex? Nothing to see here, move along, eh? So, what's the alternative, Rex, give up? Just ignore it? Oh, that's right, Rex doesn't come up with alternatives or factual responses. He doesn't have to. He's T-Rex.)
8 comments:
Have you noticed the religious jargon?...orthodoxy; cataclysmic; blastphemers; heretics; atheists....
"I am under no illusion about the force of the global warming consensus.
It is the grand orthodoxy of our day. Among right-thinking people, the idea of expressing any doubts on some of its more cataclysmic projections, to speak in tones other than those of veneration about its high-priests, such as Mr. Suzuki or Al Gore, is to stir a response uncomfortably close to what in previous and less rational times was reserved for blasphemers, heretics and atheists."
That means people like Dr. Suzki are not to be trusted due to their beliefs?
Pray to God, believe in God and it has to be the right God ... Roman Catholicism....and everything will be just fine. All you bad people who think there is a problem with global warming..."get down on your knees". Rex smells of religious conservatism all the way to the bank. Cheers
Rex Murphy is the king. King of rhetoric. He must not be bothered with facts. If he joins Fox New Network he will do well. He does not belong at CBC. Then on the other hand there are a few like that at CBC.
lI never gave much thought to the religious jargon in Murphy's writings. A Google search did, however, lead to a couple of references to "inquisition." Rex does seem to yearn for a return to the period before the Age of Enlightenment.
Right you are. Murphy doesn't know dick all. This is the guy who said there was no connection between the London bombings and the destruction of Iraq and Afghanistan. Of course in his mind anyone who doesn't go "rah,rah" for the "boys" must be a stooge for B. L.. He is one those Liberal hangers-on who plays at being "progressive" when it seems useful but really doesn't give a rats' ass about anything except his reflection in the CBC mirror.
Actually his comments are bang on - the whole global warming thing is the new world religion with its messiahs and tennants of faith. Much like the Bible, Tora or Koran, the IPCC report contains many statements that rely heavily upon the willingness of its followers to accept the teachings without question. As for your statement "...as the science builds his skepticism never truly recedes." I refer you to a recent CBC interview that calls into question the concept the science is building. ---
"It's nice to know that the ice is recovering," Josefino Comiso, a senior research scientist ...told CBC News on Thursday.
"The ice is about 10 to 20 centimetres thicker than last year, so that's a significant increase," he said.
If temperatures remain cold this winter,... winter sea ice coverage will continue to expand."
-----------
The tricky thing about believing in science as one believes in religion is that as things evolve, more and more depends on faith and willingness to believe, not in demonstable evidence.
I've read and listened to Murphy for years. After reading a couple pieces on global warming, I now immediately turn the channel as soon as he appears. Why? It is obvious that beyond the clever wordplay, the mind is absent, NOTHING TO SEE HERE. What an embarrassing old coot.
I believe now, it is called Climate Change,... can't argue with that so much.
Ron, try and read and learn. The scientific research on this problem is really spooling up and studies are coming in weekly, sometimes daily, that consistently point to the same conclusion. If you have access to some contrary "science", let's see it. If you, like Murphy, want to wallow in contrived notions of doubt, then that's just sad. When it comes to climate change science, Ron, less and less depends on faith - unless you're a doubter and then you need more faith than even, day by day, to cling to your ludicrous notions.
Post a Comment