The High Church of H.O.G.W.A.S.H.

Back in the spring, you know that 48 hour period in the South between Winter and Summer, The Anchoress posted a quickie about an excellent American Thinker essay on Global Warming. One of her commentors made a funny acronym, which she picked up on and then a subsequent commentor, Bruce, tweeked a bit. (Complicated, isn’t it? Most blog threads are…) Anyway, that little gem has stuck in my little brain for a while. H.O.G.W.A.S.H.

Highpriest
Of
Global
Warming
And
Scientific
Hooey

CloughGore Not long after her post, the High Priest himself came to Atlanta to speak at Georgia Tech. While I requested tickets to the event, but was later denied, it didn’t make alot of news. Several things struck me about the article; the picture being the most unusual.

First of all, Dr. Clough is a man of towering intellectual stature, but not in physical height. Now either Dr. Clough is standing on a box or Al Gore is kneeling. I believe it is noted in the H.O.G.W.A.S.H. Handbook that you kneel or bow to no one, unless of course they are bearing offerings of carbon offsets.

Secondly, and obviously, an adoring menion wrote the review cited above. For example,

In his lecture, sponsored by Assurant Specialty Property, Gore listed factors that have contributed to global warming, from tremendous population growth to the technology revolution that has led to “bull-in-a-china shop syndrome.” Short-attention spans, more focused on celebrity gossip about Britney Spears than important issues, haven’t helped either, he said.

The result, Gore explained, is melting glaciers, and an inevitable explosion in “climate refugees” fleeing spoiled areas…

Now Wait A Minute …I thought he invented the Internet …so he’s blaming himself for the “technology revolution”? And wouldn’t “bull-in-a-china shop syndrome” be considered PROJECTION, in the classic sense, of course. And does “short attention spans that melt glaciers” go hand and hand with the school of science that says that fire doesn’t melt steel? And Poor Britney, picking on her while she’s down. Oh wait, that’s what politicians do, isn’t it?

But I digress….back to the American Thinker article. Tom Thorstenson (who is a real scientist, not just playing one on TV) uses the basic elementary math principle of the transitive property – “If A = B, and B = C, then A = C”. Dig this:

I am referring to the fact that the global warming issue is now regarded as a “moral” matter by its advocates. None other than The High Priest of Global Warming (Al Gore) has decreed it as such. Of course, there is some obvious humor in this because the liberals will also tell you that you “cannot legislate morality”. Well, it does not take complicated logic to conclude that if global warming is indeed a moral matter and if it is true that you cannot legislate morality, then it should hold that you cannot legislate global warming.

In true leftist mind-bending logic, they have abandoned the typical name-calling meme and resorted to using “morals” as their foundation on the global warming issue. As if they ever had any… To me, this is just downright hilarious. Morals? The High and Mighty Left? There’s NO transitive property in that equation. Tom T. continues:

The most bizarre aspect of this strategy is that it is exactly what the liberals have always (unfairly) accused us conservatives of doing. Here, morality is not being used as a lens through which to view the facts, but rather as a hammer that can smash the inconvenient ones. Regardless of the evidence to the contrary, I must not believe it possible for Bob to have shot George because such a fact is not compatible with the accepted moral viewpoint! If I dare to believe otherwise, then I am “immoral”.

The message of these pseudo-moralists is that “good” people must start by accepting the pre-ordained orthodox conclusion and then work backwards through the claimed facts, making not an intellectual assessment of whether they are indeed true, but rather a “moral” assessment of whether or not they agree with the conclusion. Things claimed as facts which are “good” (in this moral sense) should be embraced and those which are “bad” (in this same moral sense) should be discarded, not because they are factually false, but because they are “immoral”.

In all honesty, this should scare the heck out of everyone. This is an atmosphere in which scientific inquiry is steered not by factual truth, but by a pre-ordained “moral” position. What is at work here is exactly what the liberals have always claimed to condemn. How is this any different from the decree of a radical theocratic dictator who will allow only those scientific conclusions which are approved by his church?

The liberals always claimed that such behavior – allowing moral considerations to trump factual ones – was the ultimate evil. But apparently, even this “ultimate evil” becomes “acceptable strategy” if the cause is justified. This is “liberal moral relativism” taken to a whole new level.

Really, you read the whole thing. In other words, another high-handed lesson in “Do As I Say, Not As I Do” and “The End Justifies the Means, if You’re a Liberal Democrat.”

Then this week, another interesting tidbit arises out of the vitrious muck that the MSM has become. Could it be we see the real reason behind the Iraq Pull-Out Obession? Doug Ross nails it:

Willfully ignoring 9/11, the plot to destroy UK airliners over American cities with liquid bombs, and the recent Fort Dix conspiracy , Democrats instead call for the study of climate change. The Junior Party is willing to divert our most valuable intelligence resources from their anti-terrorism efforts for reasons that are unserious — at best.

Yep, as Fausta noted, “Yes, we can safely say there are more immediate concerns than global warming.”

Too bad the Democrats in Congress don’t see that. They are blindly following the script Bill left in the dresser drawer of the White House. You know, the one he didn’t steal. (Doug Ross again)

Clinton’s first Secretary of State, Warren Christopher, directed intelligence agencies to devote equal efforts to “environmental concerns and national security.” The result was an outrageous waste of resources as intelligence analysts reported upon schools of fish and volcano activity. In the mean time, the Jihadi terrorist threat grew, inexorably and remorselessly, under the Clinton administration’s watch .

Unbelievable.

4 Comments

  1. July 11, 2007 at 9:05 am

    […] THIS, Edumacashun, Salieri would be proud, Faith, Politics) NO, I’m not talking about the High Priest of H.O.G.W.A.S.H. , Creator of the Giant Carbon Footprint & Non-Rock Concert , Inventor of the Internet and […]

    Like

  2. August 10, 2007 at 9:03 am

    […] a comprehensive rebuttal to the New Religion. He catches the subliminal script that the Priests of H.O.G.W.A.S.H. use – Tobacco, Nazi Germany, Big Oil Robber Barons – to befuddle the little guys with little […]

    Like

  3. December 7, 2009 at 10:11 pm

    […] wants you to know it. I wonder if there is a merit badge for that, that his mom could sew on his High Priest […]

    Like

  4. March 2, 2010 at 6:27 pm

    […] Gore (a favorite ’round here, see this and this and this and this and this and this and this and this) hood-winked the world. If he had any decency, he would return his Nobel […]

    Like


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: