Post by steve
I voted for the greens and I very much like what they do.
At least they don't lie....like Labour and the Nats and ACT and Peter
Dunne and Winston First.....
(Prove me wrong if you can).
Easy.. too easy. The Greens are the biggest liars in
From Bioscience News:
In 1993, journalist (now ACT MP) Deborah Coddington published an
article in North and South magazine entitled Little Green Lies.
She exposed some of the fallacies in arguments about the ozone
layer, climate change, recycling and genetic engineering. For
her pains she received death threats.
More than 10 years later, not much seems to have changed. Green
Party co-leader Jeanette Fitzsimons first response to the news
that Bjorn Lomborg, author of The Skeptical Environmentalist,
was visiting New Zealand last year (as a guest of the Business
Roundtable) was to say he had been discredited by a Danish
scientific body. He plays fast and loose with the scientific
facts, she asserted. She didnt bother to identify any of the
A moron in a hurry could have seen that the initial charges were
absurd. When they were damningly overturned on appeal late last
year, I called on Ms Fitzsimons to publicly withdraw her
comments and apologise. To the best of my knowledge she did not
have the integrity to respond. Greenpeace founder Patrick Moore
has recently written about the intellectual and moral
bankruptcy of the environmentalists campaign against
Greenpeace activists prevented him making the case to a
conference that allowing genetically modified rice would prevent
blindness for half a million children in Asia and Africa each
year. How is it, Moore wrote, that these charlatans continue
to stymie progress on so many fronts when their arguments are
nothing more than wild, scary speculation?
An egregious example is the scientist Stephen Schneider, once
a proponent of global cooling and more recently of global
warming. He is notorious for making the statement that to
capture public attention, scientists have to offer up scary
scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little
mention of any doubts we might have. In a recent letter to me,
one of the worlds most distinguished climate scientists wrote:
The field of climate science is almost totally corrupt.
Outside the environmental field, the respect of many Greens for
truth and accuracy is no better. MP Metiria Turei recently wrote
that New Zealand is one of the few nations that allows the
ready sale of our land to international interests. This is
nonsense: our rules are similar to those of many OECD countries,
and Britain has no restrictions on foreign investment in land at
The claims of doom-mongers like Paul Ehrlich have been exposed
as bogus for more than 30 years, yet people still listen to
them. I cannot understand why. Charlatanism does a grave
disservice to the environmental cause. As Lomborg argues, most
environmental trends are going in the right direction, but that
doesnt mean there are no problems. In New Zealand, traffic
congestion in Auckland, smog in Christchurch, loss of native
species and poor water quality are problems crying out for
obvious solutions often ones based on property rights, prices
and markets. More often than not, Greens are standing in the way
If anybody can explain to me why many Greens, who do not usually
strike me as bad or unintelligent people, are so often blind to
scientific evidence and dishonest in their arguments, I would
genuinely like to hear from them. Patrick Moore is surely right
to call for more aggressive responses to Big Green Lies; as he
says, Nothing less will turn the tide in the battle for the
minds, and hearts, of people around the world.
In the leftist's lexicon, the lowest of the low
"The unforgivable crime is soft hitting. Do not hit at all if it
can be avoided; but never hit softly." --Theodore Roosevelt