Why do documented liars and dummies get taken seriously about climate change?
Hey, Europe, about the whole climate change thing … just calm down already:
Curbs needed to fight global warming could be less drastic than a 50-percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 favored by the European Union, the United States’ chief climate negotiator said on Monday.
This, of course, echoes the latest right-wing line on climate change, which is: it exists, but hey, it’s not so bad, and we don’t need to do anything drastic about it. Let’s be "moderates," not "hysterics," where moderate = what corporatists are willing to concede at a given point in time.
Aside from the merits of the argument, what always amazes me is that the very same crowd that spent years denying that climate change existed, and then denying that human beings cause it, and then denying that it would be a bad thing … these very same people bring every new argument to the table with a harumphing air of solemnity, because they are, by their own estimation, the Serious People.
But how stupid and mendacious do you have to be, for how long, to finally lose credibility? How many times do we have to hear these clowns out, and furrow our brows, and stroke our chins, only to conclude yet again, "nope, sorry, you’re still a tool"? How long do proven, documented fabulists and dimwits get to define what’s "reasonable"? Enough already.