We can tell a lot about the liberal mindset by witnessing how they deal with legitimate dissent. While a secure person would ignore a contrary opinion or, even better, attempt to engage in discussion with another person on a matter, liberals too-often attempt to slam-shut the window of opportunity for discussion.
Those who don’t subscribe to an “America is racist” narrative are written-off as hopeless, unenlightened bigots. Those who do not validate the delusions of the mentally ill are “transphobic.” Those who assert that it’s wrong to kill babies but alright to kill murderers are anti-women misogynists.
And, of course, those who don’t buy-into the politically-motivated “science” behind the premise of man-made “climate change” are not only morons to liberals, they are dangerous naysayers who must be stopped.
According to Secretary of State John Kerry, those who do not dutifully buy-into the left’s narrative concerning “climate change” and mankind’s supposed role in this non-issue should not be allowed to hold public office.
Preaching to the choir on MSNBC, Kerry attested, (emphasis added)
But when I hear a United States senator say, “I’m not a scientist so I can’t make a judgment,” or a candidate for president for that matter, I’m absolutely astounded. I mean, it’s incomprehensible that a grownup who has been to high school and college in the United States of America disqualifies themselves because they’re not a scientist when they’ve learned that the Earth rotates on its axis but they’re not a scientist; where they’ve learned that the sun rises in the east and sets in the west and it does so 24 hours a day; and you can run the list of things that we know science tells us happens, and we accept it every single day. And to suggest that when more than 6,000-plus peer-reviewed studies of the world’s best scientists all lay out that this is happening and mankind is contributing to it, it seems to me that they disqualify themselves fundamentally from high public office with those kinds of statements. And I think the American people will decide that this year, because the American people are overwhelmingly in favor of doing something about climate change.
Not only is the “science” behind “climate change” far from settled, but the very language used to silence debate on the topic is both alarming and un-American.
For years now, the left has parroted a mantra: “the debate is over.” But it’s really not…
Some of the nation’s top minds agree that at the very least, there remains much to be seen concerning the “science” that has been irreparably tainted by political factions.
Heck, in 2014, even former Obama Administration official Dr. Steven Koonin wrote in The Wall Street Journal that there can be no firm consensus because computer models vary.
The models differ in their descriptions of the past century’s global average surface temperature by more than three times the entire warming recorded during that time. Such mismatches are also present in many other basic climate factors, including rainfall, which is fundamental to the atmosphere’s energy balance. As a result, the models give widely varying descriptions of the climate’s inner workings. Since they disagree so markedly, no more than one of them can be right.
But, according to Kerry and the rest of the liberal zealots, such dissent is intolerable. Perhaps we should burn this heretic at the stake, hmm?
Even Obama cheerleader Dr. Freeman Dyson claims that Obama is on “the wrong side” of this debate.
“It’s very sad that in this country, political opinion parted [people’s views on climate change]. I’m 100 percent Democrat myself, and I like Obama. But he took the wrong side on this issue, and the Republicans took the right side.”
Freeman claims that “climate change” “is not a scientific mystery but a human mystery. How does it happen that a whole generation of scientific experts is blind to obvious facts?”
What is, perhaps, the most-egregious aspect of the “climate change” crusade is the fact that those who have relentlessly crusaded for the legitimacy of man-made “climate change” as a fact have done so while conspicuously ignoring evidence that emerges on the issue.
“What has happened in the past 10 years is that the discrepancies between what’s observed and what’s predicted have become much stronger,” he said. “It’s clear now the models are wrong, but it wasn’t so clear 10 years ago. I can’t say if they’ll always be wrong, but the observations are improving and so the models are becoming more verifiable.”
Kerry and the rest of liberal America cherry-pick partisan “science” that will bolster their faith in “climate change” but vehemently seek to end debate on the issue.
What are they afraid of?
Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer summarized the left’s position best, writing,
It mocks the very notion of settled science, which is nothing but a crude attempt to silence critics and delegitimize debate. As does the term “denier” — an echo of Holocaust denial, contemptibly suggesting the malevolent rejection of an established historical truth.