Letters to the Editor
-
Spatial Confusion
"I for one am quite amused, although not overly surprised, about the hatred espoused toward Camille by the radical Leftists on Slate. "
You're in the wrong online magazine. Head straight right, over the porn sites, past the Russian warez site and the Suzanne Somers diet page, and park right over next to the soft, pasty face of Chris Hitchens. Try not to wake him, as he's likely having a hangover.
This is Salon. That's Slate.
-
Then you're not a Libertarian.
"Though I am a libertarian, I am a strong supporter of vigilant scrutiny and regulation of industry by local, state and federal agencies."
And since you say you're a Libertarian, please stop claiming to also be a Democrat and a Liberal.
Hell, you're not even much of a writer.
-
Who's Pretending to be Camille
WHo is pretending to be Camille Paglia, who will all know is far more intelligent, savvy, wise, discerning, and knowledgeable than the imposter currently writing her columns?
Or is this the start of senile degeneration?
-
Why are you giving her a megaphone?
Why, Salon, are you publishing this claptrap? Does someone there think that Camille Paglia is still relevant? That it's a *coup* to have her writing for you? This is a disgrace to the consistent level of truth-telling and well-researched journalism that I have long valued in Salon. Whoever it is there who think Paglia fits into this paradigm lacks an appreciation and understanding of the very website that they are supposed to be guiding. LOSE THIS COLUMN! Paglia is a hack -- and, worst of all, a smug hack.
-
Viva Camille
After reading the comments its obvious that if you deviate from global warming dogma the fundamentalists will attack.
-
a lot of hot air
It's very disappointing to hear Camille Paglia express her disbelief of global warming. To say that there is not an international scientific consesus on the issue is just blatantly false. (Sorry that I am not lending credibility to the "scientists" fully funded by the oil and coal industry). She mentions that there needs to be a balance struck between economic interests and environmental concerns, but if we destroy our environment, what kind of economy are we talking about?
She does make a good point that humans are so weak compared to nature, how can we possibly permanently affect the Earth? We are not destroying the Earth, we are destroying our ability to live on it. The planet will shake us off like a wet dog. The question is, how many species and ecosystems are we going to take down with us? The argument that global warming is still unproven is not just wrong, it is selfish, irresponsible and downright dangerous.
-
You don't get to be a global warming skeptic
Sorry, this is not a topic you can commment on because you have some mild interest in geology, or because you've once been told that this or that feature of a beautiful landscape have been created by the last ice age.
In order to form an opinion whether the main stream of a scientific field is wrong, you need to have detailed knowledge of that field. This is not something you can cobble together from random press releases, or novels. It takes years of study, hard work and knowledge of the available data.
Let's say a bridge was supposed to be build somewhere in your area, and the plans were already publically available. Now someone would write an article how that bridge could never be stable. You'd check his background and find that he didn't consult with any engineers or architects, that he doesn't have a background in mathematics and mechanics, doesn't have knowledge of steel types.
What would you call this guy? A bridge skeptic?
So ok, how can anyone then form an opinion about any scientific field? Clearly it's impossible to have detailed knowledge of every available field. So if we don't have detail knowledge, how can we then be sure that statements of experts in that field make any sense at all? The answer for that is the scientific method. Researchers must publish in peer-reviewed journals, other researchers read these articles and can comment on them, try to prove or disprove the theories suggested, or come up with alternative ideas. The important thing is that poking holes in existing ideas is the best way to advance a scientific career. There is not one nobel price to be had for repeating established ideas and saying "this sounds fine to me". There are plenty for taking an established and accepted theory and saying "hang on, there is a case where this theory doesn't work, but mine does!". So the very self-interest of the scientists is immediately driving progress.
So you get to be a global warming skeptic if you can show why in this particular scientific field the scientific method doesn't work when it demonstratably works in so many others. That would be real and important criticism.
-
Cancel Camille
She's not an intellectual, not a feminist, and not a scientist, yet Salon lets her play all three without any editorial control.
How little respect do you have for us?
-
She has a megaphone because...
...because Salon would be crazy not to give her one. Look at the responses they're getting! Angry? Yes. Indignant? Absolutely. Incredulous? But of course. Oh, and something else: impassioned. Salon keeps this aîné terrible on the payroll because they know she'll garner emphatic responses -- even negative feedback is still feedback, after all.
I loathe this woman with a deep passion; almost everything she says is petrol on a tire fire. I'm also guaranteed to read her for exactly that reason. And Salon knows it. I believe most people who say, "I'll never subscribe to Salon again" are wholly disingenuous. Much like the person who writes a letter to a radio host, claiming he'll never listen to that program again... and then keeping his ear glued to see if it gets read on-air.
"Salon: A periodic gathering of people of social or intellectual distinction." Paglia is certainly socially distinct, if intellectually devoid. Salon succeeds in giving me interesting articles from a wide variety of personalities -- which means I'll be here, reading Paglia's next insane ramblings, brickbat in one hand and Pepto Bismol in the other.