Naomi Klein of Canada is a left-wing journalist and writer. Joanne Nova of Australia is a climate change sceptic.

Here's Nova's response to Klein's comments on a global warming sceptic conference:

'Naomi can tell you the colour of the speakers hair, what row they sat in, and the expression on their face — it adds such an authentic flavor to the words, but she’s blind to the details that count — she can explain the atmosphere of the room, but not the atmosphere of the Earth... all color and style, and nothing of consequence — innumerate arguments that confuse cause and effect... she can throw stones, but she can’t count past “one”.'

Ouch!

http://joannenova.com.au/2011/11/naomi-kleins-crippling-problem-with-numbers

http://www.thenation.com/article/164497/capitalism-vs-climate

To me, the most telling part of Klein's diatribe is not her attempt to amalgamate opposition to abortion, support for gun and SUV ownership, and scepticism about climate change. One should work out what one thinks about each of these things independently. It's the phrase 'scientific consensus'. When Einstein showed up with his theory of relativity, the physics establishment didn't reject him on the grounds that the consensus was that Newton was right. Scientists don't use the word 'consensus'. Ever.

Here's my critique (well mostly its Alexander Cockburn's) of Klein's 'disaster capitalism' theory:

http://pacificaforum.org/the-shock-jock-queen