Global Warming Skeptics are Puppy Killers!

The true test of whether someone bases their view of the facts through an ideological prism or through logic and the scientific method is the Hitler trump card. As soon as you dismiss a scientific counterargument to your own research findings with an ad hominem attack, your credibility should be blown. That's why the buildup to the IPCC's Chairman, Rajendra K. Pachauri, releasing his "smoking gun" in the 4th Assessment has me gagging. His 3rd Assessment, which concluded that the Earth's global temperature had risen 0.6 degrees Celsius, and sea level had risen less than an inch, has been thoroughly debunked in this report from Christopher Monckton (h/t to Living the Petrarchan Motif). Christopher Monckton might not believe a word of the 3rd Assessment, but look how Pachauri treats economist Bjørn Lomborg, who took it as a given, but disagreed with the Kyoto Protocol as the way to deal with it:

What is the difference between Lomborg's view of humanity and Hitler's? You cannot treat people like cattle. You must respect the diversity of cultures on earth. Lomborg thinks of people like numbers. He thinks it would be cheaper just to evacuate people from the Maldives, rather than trying to prevent world sea levels from rising so that island groups like the Maldives or Tuvalu just disappear into the sea. But where's the respect for people in that? People have a right to live and die in the place where their forefathers have lived and died. If you were to accept Lomborg’s way of thinking, then maybe what Hitler did was the right thing.

Lomborg accepted the Pachauri's conclusions of the 3rd Assessment, but saw the Kyoto Protocols as too expensive for economies and found that the measures would do little to affect climate change. Apparently, Pachauri no longer needs facts to support his thinking, which makes him an ideologue instead of a scientist. A scientist seeks to sway other scientists with his evidence and research. An ideologue seeks to sway public minds for his own agenda. He even admits it: "Citing growing public acceptance of the science of climate change, Pachauri indicated he believed the United States would eventually accept emissions caps. 'Democratic governments will have to take into account the views of the public,' he said." Global warming: it's real, further research no longer necessary.