They really hate Vaclav Klaus, don't they? (3)

Here's part one of a letter that the FT cheerfully printed yesterday, it appears that 'they' (whoever 'they' are) will go to any lengths to vilify Vaclav Klaus:
-----------------------------------
Sir, What planet does the president of the Czech Republic refer to (“Do not tie the markets – free them”, January 7) when he claims that “the global climate is basically not changing”? Is he denying the documented evidence provided by climatologists that point to a 0.75 deg C increase in global temperatures over the past 100 years? Has Vaclav Klaus not read the declarations by scientists from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which stated in February 2007 that “human actions are very likely the cause of global warming”? Perhaps it might be the planet Mars that he speaks of, because his conclusions that climate change “alarmists” are responsible for “restraining our freedom” is downright otherworldly. How President Klaus downplays the evidence for global climate change, while simultaneously claiming that humans have proved themselves to be adaptable to climate change even if it were true, is truly a marvellous example of double-talk...

Calvin Quek, Singapore
----------------------------------
What sort of dumbass rhetorical questions are those? I guess that the answers are;
- VK is talking about Planet Earth;
- I don't think that VK is disputing a modest rise in average temperatures of, er, 0.0075 deg C per annum over the past century. His exact words were "The global climate is basically not changing" which seems about right to me, although it's been bloody cold recently, masking the "underlying warming trend"*;
- whether VK has read the IPCC document is neither here nor. I am sure he has had this declaration rammed down his throat often enough;
- I am sure that VK is capable of differentiating between Earth and Mars, which has had its own global warming as it happens;
- the global warmenists quite clearly are trying to restrain our freedoms, it's all 'don't do this, don't do that' which sounds to me like, er, restraining freedoms;
- as to whether humans can adapt, let me think about that briefly - Eskimos manage and Kalahari Bushmen manage; Stockholm manages and Singapore manages; in winter we turn up the heating and put a jumper on; in summer we turn it off and wear T-shirts - so yes, I think it's fair to say that "humans have proved themselves to be adaptable to climate change"

Why does the FT print this shit?

Don't answer that.

* My underlying-warming-trend-o-meter is up by 180 results since Wednesday. And I'm still number 1. Yippee!