Sir, – Michael O'Leary, with a background in economics and finance, doesn't just doubt prevailing scientific views on climate change (Home News, April 8th). He thinks it's "complete and utter rubbish" and "does not accept climate change is real".
A correspondent considers that O’Leary (among others) should not be deemed a “clown” merely because of this “sceptical” attitude.
The flaw in that generosity is that it depends on a misuse of language. O’Leary is not merely sceptical / doubtful about climate change; he’s convinced it isn’t happening and is hostile to the very idea of climate change. This makes O’Leary closer to being a (convinced) zealot than a (doubting) sceptic.
It’s an habitual conceit of ideologues, such as “Eurosceptics”, to self-describe as “sceptics”. Being seen as a rational “sceptic” gives you more intellectual standing than if you’re perceived to be a mere “bigot” or “tub-thumper” who cherry-picks or distorts evidence to avoid the discipline of thinking and/or to reinforce a subjective worldview.
:fill(white):background_color(white)/static.themebuilder.aws.arc.pub/irishtimes/1647534191476.png)
SEÁN Mac CANN,
Trillick, Co Tyrone.