Al Gore. Notice the SUV’s in the driveway.
James Cameron, Director of Avatar, the “earth is holy” movie:
Kind of interesting. Apparently living like Louis XVI is required to be one of the true disciples of global warming. That also probably explains their “Let Them Eat Cake” attitude towards those who will have to pay higher energy prices when their schemes kick in.
Tom Friedman is the latest one to mount an somewhat laughable defense of global warming. We shouldn’t call it global warming, he says. We should call it global weirding. Because, the earth getting warmer will lead to weather getting weird, not warm.
From Big Journalism:
But where Tom really shines – where I envy him as a professional who argues for a living – is how he forges an argument in which every single point of data must support its conclusion.
Here are the points I like to stress: . . . 1) Avoid the term “global warming.” I prefer the term “global weirding,” because that is what actually happens as global temperatures rise and the climate changes. The weather gets weird. The hots are expected to get hotter, the wets wetter, the dries drier and the most violent storms more numerous.
This “global weirding” argument is truly brilliant because, by definition, any observed weather phenomena supports the conclusion. Any time the weather is not precisely average is proof of global warming. Tom has taken the “global warming/climate change” switcheroo one step further – he’s set a baseline that defines, well, any weather as evidence.
This, after we had been scolded several times, saying that “weather is not climate”
Is it hot? Global weirding. Really cold? Rainy? Global weirding. Not rainy? Global weirding. This is the Holy Grail of arguments – the argument that cannot be disproven because literally everything proves it. Again, bravo – Tom, I’d be proud to have you litigate my rear-ender whiplash case.
Tom, I have to say, you have done a remarkable job with your latest column. It’s just too bad we’re nowhere near as dumb as you think we are.