More Cant

There you go again Mr. Kimball.

But this time he is quoting Michael Crichton who constructs many straw men speaking idiocies but offers no specific examples of where to find these idiots.

My point: yes there is a lot of silly environmentalism but people like Kimball and Crichton never seem to be able to actually quote them but only paraphrase nameless "environmentalists" to create foils for their own hysterical and confused views.

Yes, as in every other social/political movement, some enthusiasts get over-enthusiastic and adopt extreme positions. But you do not see mainstream environmental organizations such as the Sierra Club, NRDC or the EDF taking such views. And I am not even sure who these two fellows would mean when it comes to environmental thinkers these days. Crichton's speech would have started to be a slight bit persuasive if he had offered even ONE quote from even ONE environmentalist. But as you notice, his speech is empty of specifics but full of accusations. I used to respect Crichton but this speech makes me see him as little but another aging crank on the sidewalk but with access to the Commonwealth Club.

UPDATE: And if one is going to riposte that one look no further than Bjorn Lomborg's vindication as to procedure, I'd say 'yay!'

From the sounds of it, the Danish scientist committee acted like fools and have gotten a just cumeuppence. But there we have identifiable people who it appears have acted, at the least, very unscientifically. Go ahead and attack them as buffoons. But creating anonymous "environmentalists" so that one can then shoot down their ideas is acting in parallel --- though in a different direction --- with the apparently irresponsible Danish committee. (Btw, as I understand the matter, it is not Lomborg's ideas which have been vindicated but actually the fact-finding procedures of the Danish committee which has been dismissed as inadequate.)