« My Father's Ax | Main | Copenhagen Road Trip »

Malcolm Turnbollocks

It’s reckless to be a sceptic on global warming | Malcolm Turnbull - Times Online

It is a bitter irony that as the scientific evidence for action on climate change mounts, the political consensus supporting that action is retreating — at least in Australia....

Most leadership ballots are driven by personalities; this one, however, was driven by some of my colleagues’ relentless determination to change the party’s policy on climate change and, above all, to vote down the ETS. A colourfully self-confessed climate sceptic, Mr Abbott became leader with the support of a group of vocal climate change deniers, the most significant of whom was Nick Minchin, the leader of the Opposition in the Senate. He has said that the planet is cooling not warming, that the majority of the Liberal Party does not believe that human beings are causing global warming and that the climate change issue is being used by what he described as “the extreme Left” to “do what they’ve always wanted to do: to sort of de-industrialise the Western world.”

A curious feature of climate change denial is that it seems to be found overwhelmingly in the ranks of the old. I have never known a contentious issue where one side of the debate is so old. While I cannot explain this phenomenon, it does have a political significance.
We should listen to the young — their passion for action on climate change and their concern for the environment reflects the fact that they have the most future at stake.

Malcolm Turnbull was leader of the Liberal Party in Australia, 2008-09

So Malc, what exactly is wrong with the analysis that; "the climate change issue is being used by “the extreme Left” to “do what they’ve always wanted to do: to sort of de-industrialise the Western world.”?
So Malc, how exactly is "the scientific evidence for action on climate change mounting"?
So Malc, do you think you will always be remembered as "leader of the Liberal Party in Australia, 2008-09" Lost in Action in the Climate Wars?

Comments

Malcom Turnball belonged in the Labor (yup, that's the way they spell it) party all along. It was always kinda odd that he ended up in the Liberals (read: conservatives).

Of course our lovely leftist MSM (I confess the oxymoron) are busy making Abbot out to be a crank. I don't agree with all (or maybe even most) of his policies, but he seems a man of more principle than most politicians, e.g. his willingness to acknowledge a bastard son ... who turned out not to be his son at all. Something of a put up job there; oddly enough nothing happened (or nothing was reported) about what happened to the people who pushed that story ...

Harumph. Bring on the revolution.

So Malc, what exactly is wrong with listening to the old? Do they not have experience of the ways of politicians, and the scepticism born of years of listening to trumpetings of doom? The young, on the other hand, are herd animals par excellence - they have to be since they depend utterly upon others' experience - lokk at their penchant for fashion.

So Malc, what exactly is wrong with listening to the old? Do they not have experience of the ways of politicians, and the scepticism born of years of listening to trumpetings of doom? The young, on the other hand, are herd animals par excellence - they have to be since they depend utterly upon others' experience - look at their penchant for fashion.
(Sorry, second post after spelling correction)

It strikes me that Mr Turnbull is attempting to persuade doubters with an argument akin to Pascal's Bargain - it's better to believe in the existence of God than not, because, even if one is wrong and He doesn't exist, there's nothing to lose.

Leaving asde whether the original argument actually had theological or philosophical merit, Mr Turnbull* seems to ignore the simple fact that unconditional belief in man-made global warming does have a downside - somewhere between 28 and 56 trillion dollars per annum for the UK alone, according to what Lord Stern rather laughably considers a bankable feasibility study.

By the way, I wonder if I should write to Mr Turnbull and inform him that his ageist outburst isn't just insulting, it's factually wrong. According to his biography on wikipedia he was born on 24 Oct 1954. That makes him more than a decade older than this open sceptic. I suspect that this "it's just a bunch of old fogies" defence is simply the latest ad hominem defence dreamt up by the alarmists. Like being accused of racism or any other -ism it just shows the lefties can't muster a decent argument.

*Who I doubt has the mental abilities of Blaise Pascal's pet budgie, let alone the man himself

"We should listen to the young"

Because they're right?

Because they have a firm grasp of the principles involved?

Because they have given the matter long study?

Because they are all better scientifically trained then their elders?

No, none of the above.

We should listen to them "because [of] their passion...and concern"

In other words, they may not have a clue, but boy are they enthusiastic, so their views should prevail.

What a complete tosser.

Post a comment