In the Herald this morning Rachel Stewart, a rottweiler journalist and climate alarmist, complains about being on the receiving end of all kinds of flak drawn by her opposition to dairy farming pollution.
Now I shall tear her reasoning to shreds in an amazingly entertaining contribution to your summer holiday reading.
When I read Rachel’s article I had to chuckle but I am also forced to confess an unlikely kinship with her. For she reaps from dairying what she sows in climate change, and the feedback she gets from the dairy industry mirrors the experience of sceptics of dangerous man-made climate change such as myself.
We who have battled the climate charade for ten years and more stir the same hatred from those who make a living from climate change, the media are similarly blinkered against our views on climate change and we must grin and bear it when orthodox climate spokesmen get the same easy ride through what ought to be tough interviews.
… we have a rural media more than delighted to take BigAg’s press releases and print them verbatim. Never have I seen a rural journalist ask Fonterra to justify any of their claims.
Indeed, the rural rags feed the “town versus country” fire by constantly fuelling it with friction. They want that paradigm, that tussle. They are the equivalent of Fox News for partisan pomposity and venal verbiage.
In my case, one of them openly refers to me as “Lesbian, Rachel Stewart” — which is technically correct, but relevant how?
Because anyone over the past half decade who’s written anything even remotely resembling the truth about the dairy sector has invariably been dismissed as either a nut job, a traitor, and in more extreme cases, received death threats. Ask me how I know.
Therein lies the problem. Until the vested interests can stop with the abuse and obfuscation and admit there’s a problem with dairying’s impact on water quality, we’re all going nowhere.
Which buys the dairy industry more time, more money and more of our collective scorn. Meanwhile, our freshwater resources are dying a quiet and uncomplaining death.
The passage is well written but the topic doesn’t have to be dairy farming, it could as well be a rational view of climate change. In fact, it’s fun to repurpose it (and if you’re already deeply bored, with your holidays stretched out before you, lying on the beach with the air rippling in the sunshine over the sand, or sitting in the camper van by the stream or on a stump beside the tent up there in the sandfly-ridden bush, you could compare as we go each sentence with the one above to see how I’ve used it—fun, fun, fun):
We have a mainstream media more than delighted to take press releases from the Royal Society, Climate Change Research Institute, NIWA, MfE, IPCC and Greenpeace and print them verbatim. Never have I seen a New Zealand journalist ask these organizations to justify their idiotic 80-year climate forecasts.
Indeed, the mainstream rags feed the “we have environmentally sinned” fire with guilt-filled reminders. They want that paradigm, that moral mêlée that sells papers. [artful alliteration not contrived by me deleted]
In my case, many of them openly refer to me as a “non-scientist” — which is technically correct, but relevant how?
Because anyone over the past half decade who’s written anything remotely resembling the truth about climate change has invariably either been dismissed as a nut job, reviled as a climate change denier or, in more extreme cases, threatened with death. Ask me how I know.
Therein lies the problem. Until the climate orthodoxy can stop their deceitful treatment of climate facts, stop forcing colleagues of a contrary opinion out of their positions, and until they can acknowledge and confront the justifiable, powerful questions throwing doubt on the theory of dangerous human influence on the climate, including 240 new peer-reviewed papers casting doubt on climate alarmism published in just the first half of 2016, we’re being screwed.
Every day it continues buys the climate orthodoxy more time drawing salaries and grant money, but puts them at considerable risk of rapidly-declining credibility. The risk worsens as their climate models depart more and more from current temperatures (I mean the older climate models, the ones that inspired emissions trading schemes and ‘climate justice’ initiatives costing billions; the newer models—naturally!—match the last few years’ temperatures somewhat better). It would be odd if models tuned three years ago weren’t looking reasonably good against three-year-old observations.
Meanwhile, the money for vitally needed humanitarian relief or resolution of actual pollution problems dwindles away, squandered on feel-good climate projects of zero social benefit. The government isn’t just dabbling in the marketplace or even interfering—it’s bulldozing the market aside as prescribed by the UN’s Agenda 21 and trying to “restructure” our industry. Not so much of it here in New Zealand, but practically everywhere else. California, Spain, Germany, the United Kingdom and more.
Meanwhile, in the climate wars
To highlight popular climate change concerns, Rachel listed hillside erosion (heavy rain), flooded paddocks (heavy rain), droughts (no rain) and tornadoes (rare wind patterns). In other words, she listed three common weather events. Common: they happen all the time. Extreme weather events are like the ordinary ones, but more pronounced than normal. Note: the IPCC says that the frequency and severity of extreme weather events have not increased in about 250 years, but one day they might.
Rachel complains at receiving abuse over dairy farming but dishes it out over climate change. She’s been given a taste of kiwi-climate.
With that said, it’s unacceptable to use personal abuse against those you disagree with, or to hound them out of their job.
The time-honoured tactics of dispute resolution are still the best: confine your comments to the facts, ignore your opponents’ flaws, refute their arguments, not their character, write more clearly than they write, speak better than they speak, and never, ever, lose your composure. Not easy, but if you can follow those principles, people will follow you.