International Journal of Inactivism (now supplanted by Decoding SwiftHack)

2008/12/02

Internet Goracularities: Michelle Malkin was here

cite as: F. Bi. 2008. Internet Goracularities: Michelle Malkin was here. Intl. J. Inact., 1:181–184

The Goracle.

The Internet Goracle has pondered your question deeply. Your question was:

O Great Goracle whose feet I am unworthy to look up to: Michelle Malkin hath cited a manifestation of your supreme logo as it appeared on my humble blog. Is this good or bad? Please dispel my doubts, O Goracle Most Wise!

Your humble supplicant,
Frank Bi

And in response, thus spake the Goracle:

Goracle: Michelle Malkin? On thy blog? Ah, an interesting question; let’s see —

[a picture of Michelle Malkin automagically appears before the Goracle; enter Naomi Goreskes in a nightgown]

Some random blogger’s impression of Michelle Malkin. Please don’t assume I agree with or endorse an image just because I put it up on this blog.

Some random blogger’s impression of Michelle Malkin. Please don’t assume I agree with or endorse an image just because I put it up on this blog.

Goreskes: Hey, Gorrie… [sees the picture] What’s that — Michelle Malkin? You’re not having an affair with —

Goracle: No, no, no! Look, it’s a question from a supplicant. Check this out — Malkin takes our logo from one of our Goracularities, completely ignores what it says, and then mouths off about a “Green World Order”:

Welcome to the Green World Order, where you will bow before the altar of the global warming gods or be punished and prosecuted:

Stephen Hockman QC is proposing a body similar to the International Court of Justice in The Hague to be the supreme legal authority on issues regarding the environment.

Goreskes: Wow. She thinks that GORACVLVM·MAGNVM·NOSCETIS means something like “Green World Order”? Or that the ICJ is like the Illuminati?

Goracle: (And that the logo was created using Photoshop.) It gets better:

Gordon Brown, the Prime Minister, has agreed the concept of an international court will be taken into account when considering how to make these international agreements on climate change binding. The court is also backed by a number of MPs, climate change experts and public figures including the actress Judi Dench.

Judi Dench?! Leo diCaprio and Gwynnie Paltrow have not yet been contacted for their expert opinions yet, but were said to approve the global court scheme as well.

Goreskes: I don’t hear anyone claim that Dench is an “expert”. She’s just a “public figure” who likes the idea.

Goracle: Meanwhile the Heartland Institute says outright that people such as Steve Milloy and Tom Harris are “leading experts on climate change and related topics”…

Goreskes: Ooh, that’s so much better than movie stars! Perhaps Heartland can put Michael Crichton as an “expert” too.

Goracle: Problem is, Crichton’s no more.

Goreskes: They can make do with his ghost, I guess.

Goracle: … OK honey, just a moment while I answer the supplicant’s question… [types] Well, dear supplicant, Malkin is a prominent wingnut, and she didn’t try to put words into your mouth… so her citation isn’t such a bad thing after all. Keep it up!

[Goracle and Goreskes start making out]

You owe the Goracle a private jet made of thin air.

Advertisements

15 Comments »

  1. When someone used an EarthFirst! hotlink on their right wing blog EF! retouched the picture along the lines of “JB is an idiot” which was then prominantly displayed on his blog (the best part being it was up for quite sometime).

    How hard to substitute an image where the text around the perimeter says something along the lines of “Michelle Malkin- nothing but lies” or whatever suits the Goracles fancy?

    Comment by greenfyre — 2008/12/02 @ 19:12 | Reply

  2. Malkin actually uploaded a copy of the logo to her own space instead of linking directly to the original, so that trick won’t work.

    Comment by frankbi — 2008/12/03 @ 02:24 | Reply

  3. Another conspiracy theory for you:
    http://www.rense.com/general77/concert.htm

    Comment by James Haughton — 2008/12/03 @ 06:01 | Reply

  4. James Haughton:

    Now that’s nonconformist. Tee-hee. 🙂

    Comment by frankbi — 2008/12/03 @ 07:21 | Reply

  5. James: The altie-med ads he’s running are the icing on the cake.

    Here’s a broader, more philosophical question for you all that came to me as I was reading his segue into climate change. Take the following hypothetical situation: You’re a libertarian/conservative, and the left is calling for increased government action as a result of scientific studies. What drives you to choose to attack the science (which is damn hard if you don’t have the requisite background, and chances are that you don’t know any more about the details than the liberals you attack as ignorant conformists), as opposed to following the science but coming up with a small-government solution to the problem?

    Comment by Brian D — 2008/12/03 @ 18:25 | Reply

  6. Brian D:

    Hmm… speaking of that, I remember when I read the Heartland Institute’s blurb about how it aims “to discover, develop, and promote free-market solutions to social and economic problems”… only to see that much of the time their proposed “free-market solution” is to simply, well, leave it to the free market. But it doesn’t have to be like this: when it comes to, say, the problem of Internet privacy, there are real, concrete solutions such as Tor and Freenet, which are about as free-market as they can get.

    It’s certainly an interesting question.

    Comment by frankbi — 2008/12/03 @ 19:01 | Reply

  7. re: Malkin Damn, I was afraid of that

    re: Icke: he doesn’t seem to realize that he has become the establishment and they are giving him the finger

    Brian
    Pre-empting my blog again are you? when are you going to guest post instead of blogging in the comments 😉

    I think Frank is bang on, they are metaphorical climate christian scientists and their “answer” is ‘pray and hope it goes away’. Even they seem to realize that this would look too laughable in print so they leave it implicit rather than stating it explicitly.

    Comment by greenfyre — 2008/12/03 @ 19:51 | Reply

  8. Greenfyre: Pre-empting my blog again are you? when are you going to guest post instead of blogging in the comments 😉

    When my damn lab stops amping up my workload. 😉

    I’ve wondered about that question for quite some time, though this conspiracist sort of brought it to the forefront. (Maybe it’s party due to the recent drama in the Canadian Parliament, highlighting neconservative tears?)

    Frank: much of the time their proposed “free-market solution” is to simply, well, leave it to the free market.

    So not only do they reject science ideologically, they also reject it in their form of proposed solutions (nothing inherently unscientific about ‘free-market solutions’, but starting with a single idea and applying it to all circumstances regardless of evidence certainly isn’t science). Deeply troubling.

    Comment by Brian D — 2008/12/03 @ 22:04 | Reply

  9. Brian

    “I’ve wondered about that question for quite some time, though this conspiracist sort of brought it to the forefront.”

    You think they are responsible for amping up your workload? The same thing is happening to me! We should ask other climate realists … maybe there is something going on here.

    Comment by greenfyre — 2008/12/04 @ 12:21 | Reply

  10. looks like strange breed of idiot comments on this Michelle Malkin’s blog.

    Comment by makron — 2008/12/04 @ 16:24 | Reply

  11. Brian D:

    Well, I think my beef with the Heartland approach is that they start with the idea ‘leave it to the free market’… and they end there. It’s like the story of an Imam who said that all books other than the Qur’ān are either blasphemous or redundant. A totally stagnant way of doing things.

    Anyway, if there’s an actual free-market solution to global warming, I’m sure the entrepreneurially-minded folks would’ve thought it up by now (even if the self-styled Übermenschen haven’t).

    makron: You’re telling me. 🙂

    Comment by frankbi — 2008/12/04 @ 19:17 | Reply

  12. Hi Brian,
    The reason is that most libertarian/conservatives (a slash about to undergo a messy divorce as the republican party collapses) wouldn’t know a free market if they fell in one. 95% of them are shills, witting or unwitting, for corporate oligopolies, and as Upton Sinclair said, their salary depends on not understanding the facts. IMHO.

    The remaining 5% try to point this out occasionally: cf this article on “Cato Unbound”: http://www.cato-unbound.org/2008/11/10/roderick-long/corporations-versus-the-market-or-whip-conflation-now/ , Dean Baker’s book The Conservative Nanny State: http://www.conservativenannystate.org/ , and “Tokyo Tom” on Mises.org: http://mises.org/Community/blogs/tokyotom/default.aspx but don’t (and probably won’t) get anywhere.

    Comment by James Haughton — 2008/12/09 @ 06:15 | Reply

  13. James, thank you for the links. I already understood the basic brunt of that point, but the links you provided let me substantiate it in debate, for which I’m grateful.

    However, I wasn’t talking solely about think tanks (I could have been more precise, I admit). I’m talking about Joe Libertarian who takes issue with climate science rather than going with science and looking for solutions he likes.

    Comment by Brian D — 2008/12/09 @ 17:09 | Reply

  14. I guess the answer is that Joe Libertarian initially goes to people he thinks are leading libertarian thinkers when he’s forming an opinion on something, just like I go to people like John Quiggin (johnquiggin.com), Barry Brook (www.bravenewclimate.com) and Tim Lambert (scienceblogs.com/deltoid) (I am Australian btw); and if they mislead him initially, he is likely to fall prey to confirmation bias. Much the same process that suckered 20s and 30s leftists into the communist party. Then there’s the gradual decay of science and maths education in schools, the rise of anti-scientific religious establishments, etcetera, etcetera, all of which mean Joe is in the position of the man who asked an Irishman for directions to Dublin and was told “Oh, I wouldn’t start from here”. Joe’s scientific literacy has been under attack for a couple of decades now.

    For some free market solutions to environmental problems, I suggest checking out Lovins’ Rocky Mountain Institute and their book “Natural capitalism” (www.natcap.org). Their basic motto is “tax the things you don’t want, not the things you do” (in other words, Pigouvian taxes on waste, pollution and other externalities). Joe Libertarian probably hasn’t had it pointed out to him that a tax on CO2 and other pollutants (which we don’t want anyway) could be used to slash his income tax (which he definitely wants).

    But really, how hard can it be to see that energy efficiency is a good thing?

    Comment by James Haughton — 2008/12/09 @ 23:45 | Reply

  15. James, thanks for the favorable mention, but far from “occasionally” whacking libertarians/conservatives for their preference for denying science and painting those concerned about climate change as idiots/evil/nutjobs/KoolAid drinkers/hoodwinked/unthinking “believers” in a “faith” – as opposed to simply engaging on policy grounds – sometimes it seems pretty much almost my full-time occupation. And I think I have earned a fair degree of grudging respect and tolerance for it, despite my blogging at a libertarian site and being in their face so much on an issue that they’d rather not have to trouble themselves to think too deeply about.

    Of course I also view part of what I do is offering non-libertarians both another perspective on the legitimate concerns that libertarians/conservatives have re: AGW, as well as tools for non-libertarians to engage the “skeptics” on the right. Key tool: markets work great in generating wealth and allocating resources in socially positive ways, but where are the markets and property rights in the atmosphere (and oceans, tropical forests, fisheries, whales, etc.)?

    Regards,

    Tom

    http://twitter.com/Tokyo_Tom

    Comment by TokyoTom — 2009/03/05 @ 05:01 | Reply


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: