Adriana Barton is a far-left zealot who blogs for the Globe & Mail. Ms. Barton has never found a fact she couldn’t dismiss simply because she disagreed with it. What a great scientist she’d be!
In her latest hateful screed, she’s put on training wheels to get onto Heather Malice’s bicycle path of constant anger towards men and conservatives in general.
Charles Adler tears apart her insipid, clueless diatribe with great humour.
It would be most interesting to interview Ms. Barton about Climategate.
Looks like the mop and pail comments are not very positive about this article which is racist, sexist and illogical. White males tend to be more educated than non-white males and hence more likely to use logic to examine the claims of the CAGW fanatics. Any in-depth study of CAGW reveals it to be baseless. Yes, high levels of testosterone will make people more willing to take risks and less likely to expect the nanny state to protect them. This is not new and also applies to women.
The article is libelous in that it states that white males reject the notion of climate change. Only morons reject the facts (this includes most of the leftists who are incapable of reason) and the author of this piece makes the completely unwarranted assumption that all climate change is human caused. Any thinking person will quickly come to the conclusion that CAGW is utter BS. That the earth’s climate is changing constantly is fact and the notion that the earth was a garden of eden prior to industrial civilization with a perfect, non-varying climate is yet another moonbat myth.
I’m Conservative, I’m white, I’m male and my car runs on unleaded gas. I do believe in global warming, howevah—I don’t believe it is caused by humans–it’s (caused by)) a solar reaction! Totally out of our hands.
“Conservative white men are more likely to deny climate change” Thank you Adriana!
But your assertion that CWM are only “denying climate change” to conform with their peers of non conformist risk takers is illogical to say the least.
Growing Up Hippie by Adriana Barton
http://tinyurl.com/3tvwdrg
“Desperate to be normal, I rarely invited kids over. …They would see my hyperactive 6-year-old brother leaping around the house, naked as a monkey, slowing down only to retract his foreskin to gross us out…….. Like many adult children of hippies, by the time I hit university I had turned to therapy..”
And the therapy continues at the G &M.
Boy, is she ever in denial.
I guess to her, my wife and daughters are f*&^ed for life because of me.
@ mr hylander!!!
AAAAAA…..GREED!!!
Perhaps what is worrisome about the article (beyond the gender and race bashing) is the fact that research efforts are branching away from examining (and fudging) observations about weather and other natural phenomena. Increasingly, research is aimed at discovering ways to discredit people who hold inconvenient views. If they can discover what brings people to think in certain ways, they’re hoping that it’s also possible to figure out how to make people “unthink” them.
I sometimes feel we’re all being fitted out for the rat mask from 1984.
Its the sun, son.
Just say NO to solar warming denial.
Pure Bulverism.
People like are Adriana Barton are fact-challenged idiots—like the very nice, young Greenpeace canvasser, who recently arrived at my front door: she’d never heard of Climategate.
Add my new “CWM” moniker to my already established “WASP living in the ROC” credentials and I don’t stand a chance!
I have done my own research and have found that most ‘Climate Change Believers’ are progressive females who self-identify as non-white. They tend to be university educated,holding degrees in non-productive disciplines,and are usually avoided by conservative white males. The saddest thing is that they don’t know why.
You know what I’m getting sick and tired of?
I’m getting sick and tired of White women attacking White men.
Anyone that stupid has to a blonde woman.
Oh sorry, how sexist of me.
Not a smart career path to attempt to be a Heather clone.
“a high understanding of global warming” leads to a belief that “the effects of global warming will never happen”. Well, duh!
In the first place, it is Anthropogenic Global Warming. In the second, guess you didn’t get the memo, but after AGW was thoroughly debunked, your side dropped that for Abrupt Climate Change.
And nobody is arguing that climates don’t or shouldn’t change. Only that the effect of mankind on climate change is minimal compared to things like, y’know, the SUN.
Ye Gods and little fishes – somebody actually pays this imbecile to spew out this crap?
I don’t really know which is more sad; the fact that this deluded, bitter (and I can only assume hairy and unattractive) woman espouses an opinion like this, or the fact that this bumf is passed off as journalism. (“Yeah, we’re gonna stick it to the man, man!”)
And the fact that this hateful screeching not only exists, it is given a public airing.
I guess Barton has never heard of Ann McElhinney, who together with Phelim McAleer, made the documentary Not Evil Just Wrong
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cy4gRGic11k
The most (unintentionally) hilarious part is this segment (starts about 1/3 of the way through the above clip), in which Charles Adler, reciting the G&M article, demonstrates on-air just how bad he is at reading comprehension (thanks, Robert, for linking to it!):
“‘Aaron McCright, sociology professor…’ — can you handle just a bit more? — ‘Aaron McCright, sociology professor at Michigan State University, co-author of the study, says this is not surprising. But the study conclusion, based on data from 10 Gallup surveys,’ over ten years, ‘may have less to do with climate change than what researchers call the “white male effect…White men fear all kinds of risks LESS than women and minorities do.'” [my emphasis]
Charles’s conclusion?
“[sarcastic] White men are not risk-takers. White men fear risk. White men do not like to take risks. [snickers] Like Steve Jobs! Steve Jobs never wanted to take any risks…But if you actually spent some time in looking at the people over the past couple hundred years who’ve taken the most amount of risks, and have created the most amount of achievement, the most amount of everything, for the most amount of people, there’s a very good possibility that they’re going to be white, there’s a very good possibility that they’re going to be male, and my guess is, if you drilled down into their values, you’d probably label them conservative. This, this stuff about white conservative males aren’t risk-takers, I mean, there’s so much nonsense in this, but this has got to be at the top of the heap. Let me take David next…”
Kinda makes you wonder what else Mr Adler — a confident conservative white male — is wrong about…
Poor Mexican farmers blame Global Warming for the loss of food production..
Uh…
For the last 28 years all they had to do was slash and burn the land and the rains came and watered their new fields and healthy crops..
But….
Burning all that vegetation had nothing to do with destruction of the soils, pollution of the environment, floods, even the paths of storms..
That Mexican farmer was much more scientific than AGW Global Warming/Change/Deniers\models..
This poor family will be part of the predicted 50 million “refugees” by 2010.
2011….?
Oh, wait?
It would appear that the “science” Barton used to produce her theories about white conservative males is the same science used to create climate alarmism and CO2phobia.
Another angry marginalized harpy using radical left critical theory as an outlet for her neurosis and a consensus media job to legitimise her neurotic frothing – nothing new here.
Gabby in QC: “I guess Barton has never heard of Ann McElhinney…”
I guess you’ve never heard of the ecological fallacy.
Loki, exactly.
Adriana Barton should be nominated for the Heather Malice Award.
“slowing down only to retract his foreskin”
This would explain Ms Barton’s issues. And perhaps Davenport’s.
What a waste of 15 minutes..
The only part of this entirely lame old dribbled out ‘news’ story she left out was the hole in the ozone layer..
Do You People Not Know
That There Is A Hole In The Damn Ozone Layer!
Sheeeesh….
Wake up!
Or Doom on You!
Blending into the great cosmic oneness of liberal global humanity, the graveyard of peoples that seems like utopia to those who, through self-hatred, have become weary of life. Liberal nirvana as ethnic self-annihilation.
A six year old can’t retract his foreskin, unless he’s been molested, perhaps by an older sibling.
Someone needs to send Adriana a bound hardcover copy of Cap’n Cappy’s latest anti-shrew screed:
http://captaincapitalism.blogspot.com/2011/10/you-started-it-but-well-finish-it.html/
–Pete
Looks like she’s just saying that white males tend to panic less than other folks. Didn’t we always know that?
There seems to be a concerted effort to equate global warming skepticism with racism.
Dear Davenport. Perhaps you are right and Adler apparently, tangentially, differed from the text But how does this support the “argument” for AGW? Please explain how his misread of Barton’s nonsensical premise, makes a warmist’s misreading of all the evidence any better?
Davenport at October 7, 2011 9:46 AM, you may want to re-read Ms. Barton’s premise in her introductory paragraph:
“Let’s say you’re a highly educated white male who voted for Stephen Harper – and would gladly join the Tea Party if only you were blessed with American citizenship.
Chances are you think global warming is a load of bunk.”
So, Ms. Barton posits that opposition to the global warming theory is gender-&race-based.
That is why I pointed out Ms. McElhinney’s work. She, like myself and other women, do not necessarily subscribe to the global warming alarmism, so Barton’s argument may fall under the “Genetic Fallacy” and/or the “Hasty Generalization” category.
Wow, Davenport scores a direct hit… on a completely irrelevant tangent. Must have been waiting months for an opportunity like that.
Barton should write another article on how alarmist climate change scientists are more likely to be white males.
LOL. Yeah, AGW skepticism has nothing to do with intelligence. /sarc
Everything that Adrianna-slut loves about her life …. Heat, air conditioning, cosmetics, fabrics, food, transportation. law and order etc … were provided to her courtesy of unafraid, risk-taking, creative conservative men and the conservative women who help and love them.
Everything that puts her in peril, such as injection drug users and other criminals loose on the streets, unemployment, high taxes, poor services, nasty immigrant ghettos etc. are courtesy of Liberal men and liberal women who screw and hate them. Liberal women pretty much hate all men, however, the non Lezbozos still have needs. A major trait of Liberal women is that they are ‘needy’.
Or maybe she’s under the impression that the AGW scam was cooked up by a diverse coalition of people of color and white women.
“The Help”: Lib Author Rails Against Racism, Then Rips Off Black Maid; My Black Housekeeper
While Stockett made many appearances and gave many lectures against the “racism” and “poor treatment” of the Black maids, she ripped off the identity of her brother’s Black maid for her book, defamed her, and refused to compensate the maid for the use of her name and likeness out of the millions she made off the book.
http://www.debbieschlussel.com/40634/the-help-lib-author-rails-against-racism-then-rips-off-black-maid-my-black-housekeeper/
Mr. Adler was mistaken in his commentary, the co-author of the “CWM denial” study meant that we white males take more risks than other gender and racial groups not that we are more afraid of them. He should have been more careful.
That mistake does not make criticism of Ms. Barton’s rant less valid. Aside from the obvious slur on “fearful” minorities such as those of Chinese extraction who live in Canada, I offer up in rebuttal, the example of the Country of China. Nearly all of the 1.3 billion people who live there are um, Chinese, Oriental, a different race from white Caucasian males.
There are probably some people in China who ascribe to the theory of Climate Change or “Man Caused Disaster”, but, they are a tiny minority. China is pushing full speed ahead to have something like 75% of their electric power come from coal fired plants by 2030. In technical terms, that will be one giant whack of power compared to Canada’s output. China is the largest emitter of Carbon Dioxide by country and it’s contribution will only increase. Seems to me that if you are a member of the Climate Change Religion, it is all those Chinese males and a lot of their females too, who are taking the biggest risk.
The environments of Canada and the USA are two of the cleanest on the planet. Most of the men who live in those two countries are white. I believe these observations have as much scientific validity as the drivel about the White Male Effect. Too bad I can’t get published in the Scientific American or the Grope and Flail.
My comments from the G&M:
Most white males are not communists, and therefore object to the communist scam called AGW. Period!
Just like the “higher taxes on the rich” that the Left so desires, those on the Left are welcome to set an example and voluntarily abstain from the use of all modern technology that requires energy, and send a big fat cheque to the government to pay for CO2. Also waiting for rich Democrats that want to pay more taxes (Matt Damon, Morgan Freeman, Warren Buffet ect..) to start voluntarily pay higher taxes… crickets chirping.
The bottom line is… access to affordable fuel can be directly correlated to advancements in the Woman’s Movement. It doesn’t take a genius to realize that if the green-commies(Watermelons) have their way, we’ll all be living a 1700s lifestyle using 1700s technology(windmills). Their(the Left’s) stated intention is to make fuel/energy unaffordable! Hence the desire for taxes on Carbon. If they get their way(which they won’t) we’ll all be growing our own food, and riding bicycles to the farmer’s market. What they don’t consider, is the time and effort required to farm said food, to transport said food, and to stay clean and cook said food without access to affordable energy. If the husband must be in the fields working full-time to feed his family doing back-breaking labor, you can bet that the woman will be in the home cooking meals and cleaning cloths so that the husband CAN go-out to work in the morning. VERY PROGRESSIVE! This means no office jobs for women, no weaves, and no getting’ur nails dun. This isn’t rocket science, this is a misogynistic policy platform supported en masse by those in misogynistic third world countries where oppressing women is accepted. Forgive me if I balk at being lectured by these backwards societies, and those Watermelons that wish to emulate the third world here at home.
Grab a brain folks! We didn’t quit using wind power in the 1800s because we ran-out of wind!
The headline should read:
“White conservative males deny AGW because they are racist.”
or
“Because white conservative males disagree with liberal women and colored folks(except Heman Cain) they MUST be racist; and George Bush, Sarah Palin, blah, blah, blah.”
Just another one of those bad cases of pecker envy.
But I’m reassured that, with Dolly McGee’s kindergarten sex-ed classes, these sort of rages that are brought on by feelings of sexual frustrations and inadequacies will be things of the past.
The original Scientific American article is worth reading for a couple of reasons. One, it shows the distortions applied by Adriana Barton.
More importantly, the article shows that sociologists, who have the view that the science is settled, are trying to figure out what makes people think otherwise. (If only we could figure out what’s WRONG with these people, perhaps we could treat the problem.) They hope to discover that skeptics are associated with the usual questionable groups: men, white, conservative, probably with religious values, and uneducated. (I’m sure they were genuinely surprised at the Yale study that showed the skeptics to be better educated than the believers–better tweak those results too.)
In McCright’s study, “Cool dudes: The denial of climate change among conservative white males in the United States”, he suggests that this denial is due to “the white male effect”, white males being more accepting of risk than the rest of the public. He went on to say that this effect could stem from the notion that, historically “white males have faced fewer obstacles in life”. That may have been what Adler was trying to get at–though I agree he got tangled up.
McCright’s argument boiled down to a suggestion that conservative white males dismiss dire predictions about climate because they have higher risk acceptance than the rest of the public–the implication being that their favored position in society makes them less sensitive to the consequences of risk. It couldn’t possibly be that they tend to be more capable of critical thinking simply because they have a history of accomplishing things rather than complaining about them.
…like this from Rudyard Kipling…
If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breath a word about your loss;
In other words … conservative white males are the opposite of neurotic effeminate non men and stupid twats in the media!
She appears to be deliberately obtuse.
If not, she’s mentally ill.
However, she won’t suffer any sanction in Kim Il Jong Ontario: In the land of the blind, the one-eyed floozy is Queen.