Presland versus farmers

Auckland lawyer Greg Presland takes a generalised swipe at farmers in a comment at The Standard:

There is a certain irony that farmers, who have a reputation for denying that climate change is occurring and opposing provision of social welfare for members of our community who need it should now be seeking a benefit because of a drought that is undeniably a symptom of global warming.

Questions for Greg:

What reputation do farmers have regarding climate change?
What reputation do farmers have regarding “the provision of social welfare for members of our community who need it”?
Which farmers?

And the statement “a drought that is undeniably a symptom of global warming” indicates little knowledge of droughts or global warming.

A drought in one season in parts of one small country cannot be directly linked to global warming or climate change.

Droughts have happened in New Zealand and around the world for centuries, for millenia. They are natural occurrences.

It is possible we may get more severe and more frequent droughts due to climate change, but that could only be determined by trends over many years, not a single event.

There is a certain irony that lawyers, who have a reputation for denying justice if they can make money out of it and opposing provision of social welfare for members of our community so crime rates will remain high, providing them with endless numbvers of clients, now be seeking a political benefit because of a drought that is undeniably an opportunity to score ideological points.

Just in case someone get’s the wrong idea I’m not presenting that last statement as fact, it’s taking the piss.

There is a certain irony that a lawyer slanders so many with so few supporting facts.