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.)
The Mound of Sound 