Those Great Global Warmist People...
There is something sick at the ABC when its staff can run a website that wishes their boss Mark Scott dead. To be precise, the ABC's website says Scott should have died as a child. His wife and children, too. The same ABC site, Planet Slayer, says I must die as well, and suggests my children do so from next year. It probably wishes your children were dead, too, and has given them a calculator to figure if they should kill themselves now, or soon. True.
Planet Slayer is a green website published by the ABC as part of its crusade against a global warming that actually halted in 1998 (not that the ABC will tell you that). Among its features, all meant to freak the young about a warming world, is a calculator with an invitation: "Find out when you should die!" Feed in details such as the size of your house, your air travel, your income and your buying habits, and it tells you when you should die if the planet is to be saved for your gases.
If you don't invest in green projects or spend almost all your income on green stuff, from organic computers to hemp cars, you're told you should actually be dead already. And to drive home the message, the calculations of your date of death come with a graphic of a pig exploding in guts and gore.
What a lovely insight into the green philosophy. Children should die to save the planet. Scott, I calculated, should have died at age 4.2. A little joke, you will say. A mere attention grabber in a good cause. Trouble is, though, that there really is an insanely anti-human bent to deep green preaching on global warming, and there really are believers who feel only too keenly the planet is doomed by our sin, and humans must vanish.
Take the influential Gaia preacher Professor James Lovelock, whose latest book, The Revenge Of Gaia, calls for nine-tenths of humanity to vanish to "save" the planet from warming. Or hear the ABC's Ockham's Razor air a lecture by a former academic arguing we must "put something in the water, a virus that would be specific to the human reproductive system and would make a substantial proportion of the population infertile".
And see the lengths to which some true believers now go. There's Toni Vernelli, from animal liberation group PETA, who aborted her baby because "it would have been immoral to give birth to a child that I felt strongly would only be a burden to the world". There's Sarah Irving, from Ethical Consumer magazine, who sterilised herself because it "was the most environmentally friendly thing I could do" in a warming world.
The ABC may say it's just provoking a discussion, but there's no sign on Planet Slayer it wants anything but agreement to a philosophy of doom. For instance, it links to the websites of many global warming preachers and green groups, from Greenpeace to Friends of the Earth, but gives only two links for "sceptics" - both of which are actually to sites where activists vilify Professor Bjorn Lomborg for arguing it's a waste of money trying to "stop" warming.
Get the feeling the ABC can't tolerate giving both sides of the global warming argument? Get the feeling some of its staff would rather die than have a debate? Or rather, would rather you die - and your children, too?