George Monbiot ends his "debate" with Alexander Cockburn (see here and here) with a paragraph that more-or-less encapsulates how I feel:
I have followed Alexander Cockburn’s writing for many years and I have admired it. His has been an important and persuasive voice on many progressive issues. But I can no longer trust it. I realise that he is blinded by a conviction that he remains right whatever the facts might say. In his determination to admit nothing, he will cling to any straw, including the craziest fulminations of the ultra-right, and he will abandon the rigor and scepticism that once informed his journalism. I feel this as a loss. I am sure I am not the only one.
Update: I see Mark Hoofnagle has posted on this earlier.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Alexander Cockburn has finally walked off the cliff once and for all. As if is anthropogenic warming denialism wasn’t enough. Now - in last weeks Nation - he has described the lunatic Ron Paul as "my favorite" and "a candidate leftists can and should support". Any last shred of respect I had for…
George Monbiot posts his last reply to Alexander Cockburn.
Wisely, Monbiot has chosen not to continue arguing with a crank. At a certain point it's always a lost cause. And considering Cockburn's evidence one would be crazy to continue.
It turns out, the sole-source of his rambling diatribe…
I see that Tim Blair has decided to quote mine me. As part of my analysis of Cockburn's crankery I made the following statement.
Below the fold I'll summarize Cockburn's arguments and how they use the denialist tactics, George Monbiot's responses (including his amazing crank-fu!) and discuss why…
Readers of the Nation are probably by now familiar with the lunatic ravings of Alexander Cockburn on global warming.
What is bizarre, is that, before he traveled down this road, he seemed able to identify other crank ideas - like 9/11 conspiracy theories, and criticized them. Further, it's…