“Radical environmentalists will fight the [new executive] order in every way they can, in Congress, in the courts, in the media, and apparently in the streets. As a citizen, you need to stay informed of the stakes and tactics in this battle, and we at the Cornwall Alliance need your support to keep up the good fight.”
In a recent post, E. Calvin Beisner of the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation provided this update in the moral trenches of the climate-change public policy debate.
“Environmentalists Vow to Fight Trump in the Streets Over Climate Policy”
If you pay attention to news sources outside the typical conservative camp, you’ll have noticed two things in the last couple days: First the titles are all ridiculous in their alarmism (we are all going to die, etc.…
…“America has a short list of truly shameful ‘days,’—among them the Dred Scott decision, the Trail of Tears, Japanese internment, and Abu Ghraib—most of them symbolic of a larger national moral failure. I hope I am wrong, but I fear that today will join that list.”
“If all that [climate-policy-related] deregulation comes to pass, then I predict future generations will look back on today with particular scorn and shame.”
“A single executive order might therefore seem unremarkable. But today’s action is significant…. At stake are the global economy, entire ecosystems, and the lives of millions—most of them not yet living. Those future generations will judge the authors of today’s policy harshly.”
– Nathan Richardson, “Trump’s Climate Executive Order Discards American Values.” Resources for the Future, March 28, 2017.
“I realized that the premature consensus on human-caused climate change was harming scientific progress because of the questions that don’t get asked and the investigations that aren’t made. We therefore lack the kinds of information to more broadly understand climate variability and societal vulnerabilities.”
“Scientists who demonize their opponents are behaving in a way that is antithetical to the scientific process. These are the tactics of enforcing a premature theory for political purposes.”
“Let’s make scientific debate about climate change great again.”
“Groupthink” … “sausage making” … “bullying” … “substantial uncertainties” … “premature consensus” … These terms were used by the scholarly Judith Curry in her important, the-future-will-note Congressional testimony last week against the neo-Malthusian, nature-is-optimal natural-science community.
And what has she endured by leaving the “consensus”? Among other things, she has been labeled “serial climate disinformer” … “anti-science” … “denier.”…