Because nothing says the science is settled like silencing the doubters. These budding Nazis really hate free speech, don’t they?
Charles Krauthammer says it right up front in his Washington Post column: “I’m not a global warming believer. I’m not a global warming denier.”
He does, however, challenge the notion that the science on climate change is settled and says those who insist otherwise are engaged in “a crude attempt to silence critics and delegitimize debate.”
How ironic, then, that some environmental activists launched a petition urging the Post not to publish Krauthammer’s column on Friday.
Their response to opinions they disagree with is to suppress the speech.
Brad Johnson (@ClimateBrad), the editor of HillHeat.com and a former Think Progress staffer, boasted on Twitter that 110,000 people had urged the newspaper “to stop publishing climate lies” like the Krauthammer piece.
I understand that many people are passionate about global warming and consider skeptics to be flat-earthers. Those who don’t like the arguments by Krauthammer, a Fox News contributor, should by all means criticize, dispute, denounce and otherwise go at him. That’s how debate takes place in a country with a vibrant media culture.
Instead, these folks believe that censorship is preferable. Why engage Krauthammer when they might just be able to employ pressure tactics to silence him? And what’s the difference between this and shouting down a speaker at a town hall?
Clearly they’re deathly afraid of opposing viewpoints because it exposes them as frauds. And this tool Johnson snivels like a butthurt bitch when people challenge him:
— Brad Johnson (@climatebrad) February 21, 2014