I should mention that I don't necessarily agree that the original article only sneaks in ad hominem attacks but I would say that gratuitous insults towards "Marxists" on the left in certainly mar the conclusions it aims for.
In generally, I actually think the article tries to make the valid point that science shouldn't be manipulated by anyone. On the other hand, I think the point that since massively increasing emissions of all variety of pollutants could very plausibly be causing irreparable harm to the environment, we should cut them back seriously. I don't think that line of reasoning makes me a Marxist. I won't pretend this is a scientific argument however. But they are many situations where people have to make decisions where the science isn't settled (and waiting till the science is settled is just the decision to do nothing).
The unfortunate thing is that the level of national dialog has kind-of degenerated to the point where you get traction by clothing yourself in the authority of science and belittling your opponents. Some part of the article might serve as an effort to improve this dialog. The part where the author talks about the "Western left-intelligentsia, their kitbags stuffed with all the sub-Marxist and ethno-masochist flapdoodle of the modern Academy. They hate capitalism, they hate Western civilization, and they hate their own ancestors."
I should mention that I don't necessarily agree that the original article only sneaks in ad hominem attacks but I would say that gratuitous insults towards "Marxists" on the left in certainly mar the conclusions it aims for.
In generally, I actually think the article tries to make the valid point that science shouldn't be manipulated by anyone. On the other hand, I think the point that since massively increasing emissions of all variety of pollutants could very plausibly be causing irreparable harm to the environment, we should cut them back seriously. I don't think that line of reasoning makes me a Marxist. I won't pretend this is a scientific argument however. But they are many situations where people have to make decisions where the science isn't settled (and waiting till the science is settled is just the decision to do nothing).
The unfortunate thing is that the level of national dialog has kind-of degenerated to the point where you get traction by clothing yourself in the authority of science and belittling your opponents. Some part of the article might serve as an effort to improve this dialog. The part where the author talks about the "Western left-intelligentsia, their kitbags stuffed with all the sub-Marxist and ethno-masochist flapdoodle of the modern Academy. They hate capitalism, they hate Western civilization, and they hate their own ancestors."