Warmist Michael E. Kraft Wants To Punish Climate Deniers
Who is Michael E. Kraft? Does it really matter, because, he seems to be saying what most Warmists think, namely, yeah, there’s a First Amendment and all, but, some things are more important, so, it’s OK to violate their free speech rights. For the record, he is professor emeritus of political science and public and environmental affairs at the University of Wisconsin-Green Bay.
Most of us recognize the value of science in dealing with complex problems that pose significant risks to public health and well-being.
Thus we expect reputable science to be reported and used in helping us make difficult policy choices, such as what to do about climate change.
Scientific findings and associated uncertainties should be scrutinized carefully and debated vigorously within the scientific community and among the public.
Can’t you feel the “but” coming?
However, denying the best scientific evidence we have is neither smart nor safe. It could lead to greater societal harm than if we had taken sensible action when reliable knowledge was first available.
The best available science at the time said that the world was flat, that it was only 6,000 years old, that the Sun went around the Earth, and that witches were real. After some blather about the Cult Of Climastrology’s favorite comparison, to the tobacco company lawsuits (funny how they all seem to have the same talking points), we get to the meat
Some ask whether such inquiries should be limited to fossil fuel companies. What about extending the liability, they say, to certain think tanks and advocacy groups?
Some such groups have been heavily funded by the fossil fuel industry and have misrepresented climate change risks to the public. That might be a tougher sell, given rights to free speech, but it could be given consideration.
In other words, they could manufacture a way to eliminate Free Speech protections for those who fail to fall in line.
Our current limited policies reflect a history of science denial by fossil fuel companies and others that have sown confusion and weakened public support for doing more. Those who intentionally misled the public about climate change should be held accountable.
Isn’t interesting how Warmists/Progressives always seem to go for the Big Government, draconian, authoritarian route? Wanting to punish people for their beliefs? This is the route they will take, saying that people “intentionally misled the public” (even as Warmists are unable to support their belief in anthropogenic climate change with hard facts and data) and should be punished, 1st Amendment be damned.