Global Warming Debate

[Gwaimir Windgem]

I don't care if you say its bollocks, as long as you give a reason, which so far as I see, you haven't, only specifying precisely what kind of bollocks you mean (pathetic cop-out), and claiming that my attribution of bias and double standard to all parties is the attitude deniers feed upon (which is quite contrary to my experience, by the way). If we were to start to throw a fit everyone someone called what we said "bollocks," we wouldn't get very far!

You are right, though, I didn't intend to frame your thought in personal terms. I should have said rather that your assumption that that the employment of hypocritical double-standards is characteristic of right-wing tactics implies that left-wing tactics are quite objective and unbiased.

Blowing up abortion clinics is right-wing extremism; slogans like "God hates fags" are right-wing extremism. Climate change denial is not "extremism," it's just silly.

As regards a counter-example, I don't keep up on these ideological debates, because they are pointless. However, one example does come to mind.

When Richard Dawkins' rejection of God is criticized, on the rounds of not actually understanding the arguments rejected, he famously responds with "I don't have to understand fairyology to know there's no such thing as fairies."

Both the Creationist response of "blinded by faith" and Dawkins response of "fairies" are intended to ridicule their opponent and to render them unworthy of consideration, without bothering to actually answer their points.