I quote from the third graf of her "Skeptics and Scare Stories":
For the record, though I’m not a scientist, I don’t doubt the scientific consensus that climate change is real and anthropogenic. At the same time, I don’t often feel oppressed by other people’s metaphysical and epistemological premises, and I rarely see a need to litigate such questions before policy discussions.
I had never thought before that conservatives could be labeled with the "social justice warrior" moniker often used to tag vapid, pseudo-intellectual thought of sections of the New New Left.
But, there it is and there you have it. If some New Lefter were talking about whether or not they "feel oppressed by other people’s metaphysical and epistemological premises," we'd be on that like white on SJW rice.
Let's go on:
I … can’t recall asking any elected officials if they believe in anthropogenic climate change. I’ve asked people why they don’t believe in climate change. … But I’m hard-pressed to think of a scenario where I would find it relevant to ask Greg Abbott whether he believes in anthropogenic climate change.
Occasionally, for example, I’ve had occasion to ask legislators if they believe that human life begins at conception. I’ve never asked any of them how old they think the planet is; I don’t see why that question would even come up during the course of reporting.
Slowing climate change, after all, isn’t the easiest task imaginable. It would require drastic reductions in total global emissions of greenhouse gases; that would require most of the world’s industrialized nations to commit to major changes in their current consumption and production—course corrections that most countries would find costly and painful. Denouncing American conservatives for driving their gas-guzzlers all over the common good of humankind? That’s comparatively easy.
According to many environmentalists, journalists who fail to ask such questions are being wantonly negligent about their responsibilities to the public interest.
North Carolina businessman Jay Faison and the Republican pollsters said that in order to avoid that characterization, Republicans need to move beyond questioning and start offering solutions.
But if a supermajority of Texas is open to the idea of Congress (Congress!) passing regulations (regulations!) about energy production (energy production!) in order to reduce global warming, I don’t understand how environmentalists can, in good conscience, insist on the premise that the critical barrier to international action is rampant denialism about whether global warming is even real.
Maybe the disinvestment drive will continue to gather enough steam until it hoists carbon polluters by a capitalist petard. Or an investment drive in publicly traded renewables companies, since renewables have now passed all fossil fuels combined in installations.
And, yes, I wanted that long of a header, and hashtags, and all, since she thankfully made my light bulb come on about conservative SJWs.
Hat tip to Off the Kuff for bringing this particular stupidity to my attention.