357 Loonies and Counting | OutofRange.net

Watch this

Now what’s wrong?

There is no scientific evidence of climate change or there is a division of scientific opinion on the issue and the ad should not attribute global warming to human activity or how about the dog drowning is inappropriate for children because it will upset them and is scaremongering. Source: The Guardian

Just some of the complaints the Advertising Standards Agency received.

You know there’s always going to be division in scientific opinion, however the vast majority of scientific evidence points to climate change – just type “climate change evidence” into Google. As for upsetting children has the complainant read any of the Brothers Grimm’s fairy tales? Lunatic in chief Steve Green has even set up a petition.

We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to Stop wasting taxpayer’s money on climate change propaganda designed to frighten our children. Number 10.

I think it’s designed to shame parents not frighten children, but that’s nitpicking, you know the scientists could be wrong – lets hope so – but I repeat – the reality is that the weight of scientific evidence suggests if we don’t do something now then those of us who survive are doomed to a miserable future.

Amazingly the petition has 489 signatures – lunatics every one of them.

One thought on “357 Loonies and Counting”

Lunatics. Yup, that’s what anyone who dares doubt the ‘concensus’ is called. I guess if we are going with the theory that if told often enough that something is true and we shouldn’t question it, we should just believe, surely this subject now falls under the category of faith, not science. In which case I’m getting my uneducated-non-scientific ass down to church to pray for my eternal soul. Same reasoning as climate-scarers. I have just had a ‘discussion’ with someone calling themselves a scientist elsewhere, and when i posed a series of fair questions, I was told that I wasn’t able to understand. Standard response – why not try explaining to me instead of patronising and then dismissing me.
This whole malarkey may be true, but the fact that this has become a politicised ideology which cannot and must not be questioned makes me want to scream.

Stanners on October 21, 2009 at 5:32 pm said:

Lunatics. Yup, that’s what anyone who dares doubt the ‘concensus’ is called. I guess if we are going with the theory that if told often enough that something is true and we shouldn’t question it, we should just believe, surely this subject now falls under the category of faith, not science. In which case I’m getting my uneducated-non-scientific ass down to church to pray for my eternal soul. Same reasoning as climate-scarers. I have just had a ‘discussion’ with someone calling themselves a scientist elsewhere, and when i posed a series of fair questions, I was told that I wasn’t able to understand. Standard response – why not try explaining to me instead of patronising and then dismissing me.
This whole malarkey may be true, but the fact that this has become a politicised ideology which cannot and must not be questioned makes me want to scream.