Why conservatives are climate change sceptics
Full Article : http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/45394.html
The simple fact is it’s because, to conservatives, climate change is not about science or economics. To conservatives, climate change is a moral issue.
And the moral worldview adopted by many conservatives predisposes them to reject the very notion of anthropogenic climate change well before any evidence or reason has a chance to interject.
Why a moral issue? Because politics is, for many, an inherently moral subject: it has to do with the duties and obligations of those in power over the people. And when it comes to morality, and how we form our moral attitudes, it’s (sadly) not reason that is the prime mover, but psychology, emotion and ultimately our implicit worldview.
Lying just beneath the surface of all our well thought-through political attitudes, just deep enough to evade easy observation, is our implicit worldview. This is the way we make sense of the world around us, and inject it with meaning and value. It operates automatically, parsing a scene as we observe it, giving it its salience and inspiring an immediate emotional response.
Christopher Pyne: The term ‘Climate Sceptic’ is a ‘holocaust allusion’
Posting the whole article because this is important. It is important to see the STUPIDITY and IGNORANCE and the lowness the Opposition will go to to win , regardless of the cost , the truth and the humanity.
Article here: http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/03/22/3170694.htm
Prime Minister Julia Gillard described Tony Abbott as a climate change denier – a frequent political barb used against the Opposition Leader.
But the Manager of Opposition Business, Christopher Pyne, took a point of order.
"I think the words being used by the Prime Minister would be regarded as offensive words," he said amid rowdy scenes.
"We all know the connotation the Prime Minister is trying to bring about by using the word ‘denier’.
"We know she’s trying to allude to the holocaust. It is offensive and it must stop."
Speaker Harry Jenkins said he had to use "all the sensitivity" he could muster to hush the House.
"I think that the construction the Manager of Opposition Business has placed at this point in time is stretching it," he said.
But Mr Pyne was not prepared to leave it there.
"Mr Speaker, with 18 years in this place I don’t think anybody would accuse me of making light of the holocaust or any issue to do with the state of Israel," he said.
"I was 11 years as chairman of the parliamentary friendship group on Israel. I make the connection between climate change denier and holocaust denier.
"I find it offensive and I’m sure the Leader of the Opposition finds it offensive. In that spirit I would ask you to ask [Ms Gillard] to withdraw it."
But the Speaker would not be moved – and delivered a reprimand to both sides.
"I simply say to the House that actually having come to this flashpoint I would hope that members take a deep breath and behave in a manner that those that observe us from outside would expect," Mr Jenkins said.
"That would apply to both sides actually turning down the heat, turning to the basics of what we are here for.
"That is to debate the issues and not get into the personality clashes that we are seeing over many question times.
"Regrettably, we are judged by this hour-and-a-half of our proceedings."
But neither would Mr Abbott leave it alone.
"I find the Prime Minister’s statement both untruthful and offensive. If you don’t wish to ask her to withdraw Mr Speaker, I just want to place on record it is both untruthful and offensive," he said.
Mr Jenkins wanted no more of the issue.
"I hope that the whole membership of the House would see this as a full stop," he said.
Tony Abbott questions scientific evidence for climate change – Does not accept carbon dioxides effects, cutting greenhouse gas not important
“…whether carbon dioxide is quite the environmental villain that some people make it out to be is not yet proven.”
“…I don’t think we should assume that the highest environmental challenge, let alone the great moral social and political challenge of our time, is to reduce our emissions,”
I was wondering about the timing of this “coming out” as an explicit climate change denialist… not even 48 hours after his dear Cardinal Pell launched an attack on climate science
Article here: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/pell-row-with-climate-scientist-heats-up-20110313-1bsx6.html
Not a coincidence?
Cardinal Pell made this famous comment in his 2006 Legatus Summit speech:
Some of the hysteric and extreme claims about global warming are also a symptom of pagan emptiness, of Western fear when confronted by the immense and basically uncontrollable forces of nature. Belief in a benign God who is master of the universe has a steadying psychological effect, although it is no guarantee of Utopia, no guarantee that the continuing climate and geographic changes will be benign. In the past pagans sacrificed animals and even humans in vain attempts to placate capricious and cruel gods. Today they demand a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions.
Complete
and utter
Asstards
