There is only one term for this

stupid by greeblie

Global Warming, Creationism & Brain Death
[Via The Sensuous Curmudgeon]

The irrational union of creationism and the ClimateGate frenzy over global warming has reached what seems to be a journalistic climax. We don’t see how it can get any worse than what we’re going to discuss today.

We first observed this madness manifest itself at the Discovery Institute’s blog, and we noted it here: The Mask Falls Away. The Discoveroids were using the global warming email imbroglio as “proof” that brave dissenters from science orthodoxy (such as creationists like themselves) have been suppressed by ideological conspirators. We labeled this interpretation of ClimateGate as the “vindication of all kooks” doctrine.

The theme was picked up by former Senator Rick Santorum, a creationist and Presidential hopeful. See Santorum, ClimateGate, & Creationism: Axis of Idiocy.

The infection then spread to Human Events, which we wrote about here: Creationism & ClimateGate in “Human Events”. We can’t keep up with this virus, but we noted most recently that it had spread to a fringe publication called Right Side News. See: Global Warming & Creationism: Yet Again.

Today, dear reader, to no one’s surprise, the madness has spread again, this time to a very susceptible carrier of such infections, WorldNetDaily. They’ve already won our Buffoon Award, so we can’t decorate them further. Thus we’re adorning this post with the image of Alley Oop — our ultimate symbol for creationist madness.

Wait — we just realized that WorldNetDaily foreshadowed the ClimateGate-creationism coupling more than a year ago. See: WorldNetDaily Links Global Warming and “Darwinism”. Perhaps they started this plague. Now it’s come full circle.

We present to you, dear reader, some excerpts from Darwin is freezing over, which appears in the trashy pages of WorldNetDaily.


The Stupid. It Burns. (for the picture. perhaps we researchers should buy a ton of them) I feel dumber just reading this second-hand.

2 thoughts on “There is only one term for this

  1. Why is it necessary to call Deniers names? Isn’t calling them Deniers enough? After all, as scientists and Ph.Ds, it should be easier to find legitimate words to call them. And while I am at it, if someone has a question about anything a SCIENTIST says, does that auomatically make them a Denier? Anyway, I am going to have to quit reading a lot of the “scientific” blogs that use the f-bomb, mf, etc. etc. A shame since some of them make good points, I guess.

  2. As I said, it was the picture I was referring to. I’ve changed the link so it only goes to the picture and not the web page, since it apparently confuses things. Thanks for pointing that out.

    I use a specific term, denialist. As I have written many times, this is not someone who asks a question, nor is it someone who is a skeptic in the true sense of the term. Those people are necessary for science to move forward.

    It is a person who continues to discuss the same things long after they have been debunked. It is someone who continues to use logical fallacies long after they have been pointed out to them. It is someone who must deny facts for some personal or political reason that has little to do with science. It is someone who works to make it harder to do research, not easier, by undermining its principles, as well as its practitioners.

    I believe that term describes these people and groups accurately.

    In this current post, the author was working with a newer phenomenon – serial denialists. These are people who use their denial of one area of science to support their denial of another. These are not ignorant groups who simple do not know better. These are not groups with questions.

    These are groups that are deeply anti-science and work hard to undermine its exercise for their own purposes. It is a newer thing to observe so we may not have the best jargon for it yet. For the moment, vindication of the kooks may have to do until a better phrase comes along.

Comments are closed.