Guilt by association

One of the ways the climate alarmists support the propagation of their viewpoint is by comparisons to the debate about creationism.

On Monday, the National Center for Science Education, a nonprofit group that denounces intelligent design and supports an evolution-only curriculum in the classroom, will expand its mission. The organization of scientists, anthropologists and others is turning its attention to climate change, and it will mount an aggressive effort to teach the nation’s schoolchildren that climate change is real and is being driven by human activity.

“For 20 years, we’ve helped teachers cope with what we can only describe as societal or political problems in teaching evolution. They’re running into the same opposition in teaching climate change,” NCSE Executive Director Eugenie Scott said. “We worry, because of our experience with evolution, that basic science is going to be compromised as a result of this political and ideological opposition. Good science needs to be taught.” [Washington Times]

As with any propaganda effort, the need is to get the young first:

With no legal defense, the NCSE and other groups instead will launch a public relations effort. If it is successful, climate change skeptics could become a small minority and might be derided for their beliefs.

So, if you have questions about the climate record, about the methods used to collect climate data, how climate data is processes, the efficacy of models, or other skepticism regarding the conclusion that there is a human caused climate disaster coming soon, you suffer from irrational “beliefs” just like the creationists do. The matters of the evidence and how they differ in these two cases is enough to raise suspicion about what psychiatry calls projection. The weaknesses in the evidence are similar between creationism and climate alarmism and this seems to be twisted around in some minds trying to defend their belief that humans are causing a climate catastrophe. That alone should raise questions as psychological defenses are symptomatic of behavior trying to deal with the consequences of a lack of intellectual integrity.

Comments are closed.