What if the much ballyhooed “consensus” on climate change is a consensus of ignoramuses?

Miranda Devine permits global warm-monger David Suzuki to (largely) condemn himself out of his own mouth.

Elsewhere, among the climate illiterati, Al Gore moves one step closer to clinically-certifiable insanity by arguing that “denialists” should be silenced:

Former vice president Al Gore on Monday called for making climate change "denial" a taboo in society.

“Within the market system we have to put a price on carbon, and within the political system, we have to put a price on denial,” Gore said at the Social Good Summit New York City.

“It is simply not acceptable for major companies to mimic the unethical strategy of the tobacco companies in presenting blatantly false information in order to protect a business model,” Gore added, alleging that’s what some oil and coal companies are doing. “There needs to be a political price for denial.”

He continues in the same vein (lord, does he ever):

He urged attendees to challenge denial of climate change in conversations in families and communities and elsewhere. “We can win this conversation and winning a conversation can make all the difference,” Gore said. “Don’t let denial go unchallenged.”

Gore noted how racism and later homophobia have become increasingly unacceptable.

First, how does one “win” a “conversation”? In fact, under Gore’s prescriptive abolition of the free exchange of ideas and opinions on this subject, how do people go about having a conversation at all? Secondly, trying to link skepticism about climate change with racism and homophobia has got to be one of the most preposterous non sequiturs uttered by any public figure in history; it is mere name-calling. Why stop with racism and homophobia, Al? Why not draw parallels between skepticism and, say, pedophilia or, perhaps even more horrifying to your natural constituents, between skepticism and membership in the NRA?

This is nothing but quasi-religious hysteria, with Big Al stepping out as the Vicar of Gaia on Earth, or perhaps the Mohammed of Bad Weather (or maybe Daddy Warmbucks is a better handle - one should never overlook the possibility of simple greed). Why should anybody accept his pompous bloviation in lieu of facts? I’d love to see this clown debate somebody like Lord Monckton (Pardon me, did I say “debate”? That is not really the mot juste. “Whacked explosively, like the world’s largest piñata, by an unblindfolded Miguel Cabrera” is more descriptive of the probable result of such an encounter).

Gaia: “Thou art Al, and upon this bag of rocks shall I build my highly lucrative church; and the gates of reality shall not prevail against it.”


Thar’s gold in that thar globaloney!

A big H/T to Small Dead Animals for the first two links.