Selfish Percentdollarnumberatexlamation? I’ve Been Called Worse.

First I would like to offer an apology for misspelling a fellow blogger’s name – Ms. Julie Johnston. I had mistakenly spelled her name with an “e” (Johnstone).

Having committed that seemingly rather simple, human mistake, I was rather taken aback to find that I had “lost any last shred of credibility” because of the error.

Ms. Johnston (no “e”) recently blogged:

“And why should I live in a cold house all winter to lower my carbon footprint when that selfish %$#@! I wrote about a while ago doesn’t give a crap about today’s children or future generations? (By the way, turns out he’s read one book on climate change written by a denier, which of course makes him an expert. And he couldn’t even spell my name right when he slagged me in his blog … he kinda lost any last shred of credibility when I saw that.)”(

So, let me see if I have this correctly – in Ms. Johnston’s world, one lost “e” in a name shred’s credibility.

Well, I must admit I have been marveling at the hypocrisy of Ms. Johnston chiding me for making such a simple error in her name, while spewing so much misinformation about me in one paragraph.

1. Contrary to her above assertion, I do “give a crap” about today’s children AND future generations. I have written extensively about the fact that simple solutions to real, existing problems like lack of water, sanitation, food, medicine, education, and habitat worldwide have fallen by the wayside in the name of CO2 reduction. It is estimated $37 trillion would be required to meet Ms. Johnston’s carbon reduction goals, while one trillion would feed the world’s starving children for 200 years. While 16,000 children a day die because of their current “environment,” Ms. Johnston is happy to extoll the virtues of her sitting, shivering in her “cold house,” to combat CO2. And, the colder it gets, the more bitter a winter I’m sure it will be in her world.

2. Contrary to her assertion I have read only “one book on climate change written by a denier,” I have, in fact, read dozens of books (not “one book”)  on climate change, written by a myriad of scientists, quoting hundreds of studies, and have been interested in the subject for years. I have never proclaimed myself and expert, just an interested individual who enjoys learning more. The information I use is from scientific studies, or based on them. Since Ms. Johnston does not know me, and has never asked me how many books I have read on the subject, and without any explanation to the contrary, I have to conclude she is also comfortable creating baseless allegations and lying to her readers in an effort to discredit myself and my views.

One must ask the question of Ms. Johnston – why is it necessary for someone to use ad hominem, emotionally charged attacks to support your position and beliefs?

The answer to that question can be found in an examination of the associated fundamentalist theory – Anthropogenic Global Warming – which gives rise to the “belief” man is destroying the planet.

So, sorry about spelling your name wrong, sorry about the self-imposed temperature of your living quarters (I’ve got my thermostat set at 70), sorry you are so bitter, sorry that the science behind manmade CO2 global warming is falling down around your ears, sorry for the grief this must all cause you, and sorry you are such a sad, sad, sad individual.

There are my apologies…where are yours?

PS – Durban is not going to make you a happier camper.






One Response to Selfish Percentdollarnumberatexlamation? I’ve Been Called Worse.

  1. Paul Marcano says:

    Hehe, I must say, it is interesting how we are all becoming such well-informed arm-chair environmentalists with no credentials to speak of. Everyone who take up this issue inevitably finds where the bullshit and truth lies in deciphering ‘the science’. Often at tax-payers expense the nuances and arguments over our planet’s ever-changing climatic conditions are almost reduced to the basic question of whether there is a God or not and if so, are we still comfortably guilty as sin? I kid you not.

    As long as Climate Gate continues to unravel the disingenuous distortions of the IPCC and “the science’ behind their agenda, I think we will find, as we did with religion, that science itself fails us in coming to any kind of rational understanding of this complex matrix we call the planet Earth or the Universe for that matter.

    That said, I fully support the information age job opportunities that are presented by funding research and consulting on such long term infinite issues of exploration. It is long past the time when we should be acknowledging that we have arrived in the 21st Century Golden Age of the pursuit of knowledge and wisdom. The benefits of our Information Age in Canada need not be confined to governmental jobs that top the wish-list of every category of work that students desire in their educational programs. Anyone interested in seriously exploring any subject whatsoever should be funded because all of their data can and should be posted to the ever-growing universal information base we call the Internet. We should all be paid on a price per byte of global community contribution to add yet another perspective so that we can all get the best grasp on the intangible.

    One important thing to keep in mind and that is that fear and guilt are totally unnecessary counter-productive strategies to pursuing a love of a particular subject and making it your livilihood. Anyone who says the conversation or debate is over on any subject should be seen as an enemy of new knowledge and cut off from funding immediately! Those kinds of tactics merely carry over from an age when people worked in fields of endeavour for companies and corporations whose main agenda was to make themselves exclusive.

    The religious fervor we are seeing in our modern day climate researchers appears almost as a transference of a former religious fear and guilt complex transmorgrified over to this Anthropogenic blame game, it is quite remarkable to witness. Personally I feel that it does nothing but make the public cynical about funding such research. Anyone who is a concerned parent should also be appalled at the tactics used by environmental researchers to steal an optimistic future from our children with bad science and delusions of end of days scenarios.

    Fact is, since the Ice Age we have gone from 197ppmillion CO2 to close to double that and since oxygen giving plants require an absolute minimum of 220 ppm, preferring a lot more to thrive, this statistical argument needs to be put into perspective. It should certainly not be made into the freakout show it has to solicite funding. We need to fund research period, there is no need to pull rank on the human psyche.

    Peace Love and all that good stuff. 😉
    If you think these thoughts which took me quite some time to compose, contribute anything please make a small donation to my PayPal Account at

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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: