I reproduce the comment I've just read verbatim for your edification...
Reduce carbon dioxide emissions from shipping by a billion tonnes a year? No problem.
Remove the diesel engines from the world's existing fleet and convert them into galleys.
Conscript everybody whose body mass index is too high to pull the oars. Two problems are thus solved in one stroke.
Julian Glazer, Westcliffe-on Sea, UK
So where did I read that? In the bloodvessel-bursting pages of the Daily Mail? In the heart-attack-inducing print of the Sun or the possibly carcinogenic words of the Grauniad? Some crazed hack-rag, surely?
The letter, for letter it was, not some unmoderated forum post, was selected for publication and printed on page 31 of issue no. 2827 of New Scientist.
New Scientist used to be about science. Now it simply pushes the socialist control agenda and approves of the hate and bile directed against anyone who does not fit the British Standard Human model devised by neo-eugenecists. Oh sure, there's still some interesting astronomy in there, sometimes there's some entomology but it's all just a cover for the fact that most of the magazine is a Stalinist mouthpiece now.
Everything is related to global warming. Everything. If there's a dust storm on Mars it's because you turned your kettle on. Salt. Fat. Smoking. Drink. All the made-up numbers and ridiculous studies are included with not a shred of critical thought involved at all. It fits The Agenda so it goes unquestioned. Call for Hitler-style punishments for those who don't conform and New Socialist will print it. Point out the insanity and you are a 'denier'. A heretic.
Scientists read this magazine. I, like most scientists, used to rely on it for understandable explanations of work that was far outside my own field. I can't rely on it now. I know they are printing lies and hate and so I can no longer rely on any article printed in there. Is it real or is it propaganda? If it's outside my own knowledge base I can't tell any more. This copy was the first I had bought in months and it'll be longer before I buy the next one. What's the point? It's a hate publication now. If you hate the Denormalised that's just fine with the editors.
I'm not obese, not even by the narrowing definitions of recent years designed to drum up business and new scare stories. I do like to smoke and drink and I don't want a bunch of pompous Borg telling me to conform. I like salt. I like crackling on pork. I am not going to live a dull life just to fit with some control freak's demands. You can shout about me 'costing the NHS money' even though I haven't and in fact the NHS has cost me a hell of a lot of tax money over my half-century of existence. You don't want me to use the NHS in the future? Then shut it down right now. Then it won't cost either of us anything, will it?
I have to wonder what the NHS is for since it doesn't want to treat sick people but instead wants to direct our lives in minute detail. I have to wonder what New Scientist is for if it is no longer interested in the two-way world of science but only in the one-way world of totalitarian control. Science is all about disagreement but New Scientist believes in the 'We are right because we say so' version of science put out by the BMA, ASH, the Church of Climatology and many others. Disagree and you are deemed worthless.
I am not obese but I will not stand by why the obese are derided as nothing more than oar-fodder. Why? I know there are those who make Mr. Blobby look like a swimwear model and who hate me because I smoke so why defend them? Why not let New Scientist's correspondents yoke them to an oil tanker's oars and let them puff away into the sunset?
Why? Because it's the same thing again. It's population-splitting. Not all chubbies are rabid, vicious antismokers. Not all smokers are slim. Not all smokers are drinkers and vice versa but read the letters and the comments and you'd believe that we are all disparate groups. We are not groups at all, we are individuals, and neither the NHS, the BMA nor New Scientist can cope with that. We must fit a pigeon-hole or they can't deal with us. So much for superior intellect.
Some people like cannabis. I don't but I don't care if someone else does. Some people don't eat pork, others don't eat beef. I eat anything but I am not interested in forcing the non-pork and non-beef eaters to comply. Some like to be vegetarian or vegan, and I have no problem with them not eating meat. Some people prefer to avoid alcohol and/or tobacco and that's fine with me.
All I ask is the same in return. I have never forced any of you to live like me. Just leave me alone.
Some people like to be larger than others, some like to be slimmer than others. Neither is any concern of mine. Nor is it any concern of anyone else. No concern of the NHS which we all pay for, including smokers, drinkers and the obese. No concern of the BMA or the WHO which nobody voted for and who therefore represent only their own bank accounts. Which, incidentally, you smoke/drink/fat haters are also paying for, as are we. Yes, we pay them to order us around but we have no means of telling them to stop. We all pay ASH too, did you know? They cost the taxpayer more than smokers ever could. Look at the numbers. The real ones.
So it's official. Letters demanding that fat people be put into slavery are approved and published in the name of global warming, in a mainstream science magazine. Aren't you delighted, Righteous? Aren't you polishing up those gas-chamber guard jackboots ready for the day your services are required? Won't be long now.
If you're a fat smoker-hater, sit down and think because you are one of us now. You are in here with the smokers and drinkers and all the rest of the Denormalised. Yes, it's your turn in the hatred chair.
'Science' has spoken.