Sunday, February 11, 2007
“Global Warming” Fanatics Now Reaching Hysterical Levels
“Global Warming,” the new article of faith amongst the Left, has already reached the level where if you’re a climatologist who disagrees with the Faith you could well lose your job – or your credentials. There’s nothing more exciting than a trendy new “talking point” – such as the Kyoto “treaty” that John Kerry recently highlighted as one of the reasons the United States is now a “pariah” around the world (even though he voted against Kyoto).
But calling your own country a pariah is no longer enough, apparently. Neither, it would seem, is losing your job or facing professional ostracization. Now it appears that people who question the hyperventilating over “Global Warming” are the equivalent of those who claim that Nazi Germany never slaughtered 6 million Jews and roughly 6 Million Slavs, handicapped, gays and others. In other words, "Global Warming" skeptics are now the equivalent of “Holocaust Deniers.”
Long-time Boston Globe columnist, Ellen Goodman, is leading the way with this new level of political strong-arming with her February 9 column.
Now, don’t get me wrong. I’m still in the “undecided” category on the “global warming” issue – I find it curious (for example) why one of the fastest growing economies on the planet (China), and the most populous nation on the planet (China) was exempted from the Kyoto treaty. And I’d rather be pretty certain before obliterating the US economy. But since I do show some level of skepticism, or at least a “prove it to me” attitude, I now find myself in the same category as racist hate-mongering neo-Nazis and believers in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
This got me thinking. I always get a little uncomfortable when people without a scientific background presume to lecture the rest of us on the scientific method, and what qualifies as a scientific fact. I become even more worried when they back that up with the passionate zealotry of the newly converted, including charges that sound a lot like “Blasphemy! Heretic!” I mean, if the science is so compelling, then why the over-the-top rhetoric?
But what concerns me even more is when one of the High Priests of popular weather forecasting, the lead climatologist for the Weather Channel, calls for the excommunication of those unbelievers who question Doctrine, as with Heidi Cullen’s proposal that meteorologists be stripped of their scientific certification if they happen to be skeptical about the theory of human-generated global warming. Human-generated global warming may, or may not, be a reality. But there should always be room in the scientific community for the outsider skeptic who is willing to buck the trend and challenge the current understanding of the general scientific community.
After all, from such sources occasionally come insights that prove eventually to be true. It wasn’t all that long ago that mainstream Science disbelieved the idea that the Earth had been struck by meteors large enough to make craters. At least until an outsider (Shoemaker) forwarded the idea, defended it against personal and professional attacks, and persisted and proved his case. There are many such examples, another one being the idea of plate tectonics.
Without these mavericks we may not have come to these new understandings for many decades – or worse. But with Global Warming there seems to be a willingness to try to shove out these theoretical lepers – silencing them by threats to their livelihood and reputation. And now, accusing them of being the equivalent of Klansmen.
There’s something fishy going on here, some reason why the push for Global Warming is generating such intense and oppressive intellectual thuggery. Whenever something generates so much unreasoned passion, to the point of making threats, I have to wonder about the motives behind it. I mean, they’re lecturing us on the scientific method, while at the same time threatening those who question.
Questioning is the very heart of science. And there is never a time or place when it is inappropriate to question the current scientific paradigm.
“Global Warming,” the new article of faith amongst the Left, has already reached the level where if you’re a climatologist who disagrees with the Faith you could well lose your job – or your credentials. There’s nothing more exciting than a trendy new “talking point” – such as the Kyoto “treaty” that John Kerry recently highlighted as one of the reasons the United States is now a “pariah” around the world (even though he voted against Kyoto).
But calling your own country a pariah is no longer enough, apparently. Neither, it would seem, is losing your job or facing professional ostracization. Now it appears that people who question the hyperventilating over “Global Warming” are the equivalent of those who claim that Nazi Germany never slaughtered 6 million Jews and roughly 6 Million Slavs, handicapped, gays and others. In other words, "Global Warming" skeptics are now the equivalent of “Holocaust Deniers.”
Long-time Boston Globe columnist, Ellen Goodman, is leading the way with this new level of political strong-arming with her February 9 column.
By every measure, the U N 's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change raises the level of alarm. The fact of global warming is "unequivocal." The certainty of the human role is now somewhere over 90 percent. Which is about as certain as scientists ever get.
I would like to say we're at a point where global warming is impossible to deny. Let's just say that global warming deniers are now on a par with Holocaust deniers, though one denies the past and the other denies the present and future.
Now, don’t get me wrong. I’m still in the “undecided” category on the “global warming” issue – I find it curious (for example) why one of the fastest growing economies on the planet (China), and the most populous nation on the planet (China) was exempted from the Kyoto treaty. And I’d rather be pretty certain before obliterating the US economy. But since I do show some level of skepticism, or at least a “prove it to me” attitude, I now find myself in the same category as racist hate-mongering neo-Nazis and believers in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
This got me thinking. I always get a little uncomfortable when people without a scientific background presume to lecture the rest of us on the scientific method, and what qualifies as a scientific fact. I become even more worried when they back that up with the passionate zealotry of the newly converted, including charges that sound a lot like “Blasphemy! Heretic!” I mean, if the science is so compelling, then why the over-the-top rhetoric?
But what concerns me even more is when one of the High Priests of popular weather forecasting, the lead climatologist for the Weather Channel, calls for the excommunication of those unbelievers who question Doctrine, as with Heidi Cullen’s proposal that meteorologists be stripped of their scientific certification if they happen to be skeptical about the theory of human-generated global warming. Human-generated global warming may, or may not, be a reality. But there should always be room in the scientific community for the outsider skeptic who is willing to buck the trend and challenge the current understanding of the general scientific community.
After all, from such sources occasionally come insights that prove eventually to be true. It wasn’t all that long ago that mainstream Science disbelieved the idea that the Earth had been struck by meteors large enough to make craters. At least until an outsider (Shoemaker) forwarded the idea, defended it against personal and professional attacks, and persisted and proved his case. There are many such examples, another one being the idea of plate tectonics.
Without these mavericks we may not have come to these new understandings for many decades – or worse. But with Global Warming there seems to be a willingness to try to shove out these theoretical lepers – silencing them by threats to their livelihood and reputation. And now, accusing them of being the equivalent of Klansmen.
There’s something fishy going on here, some reason why the push for Global Warming is generating such intense and oppressive intellectual thuggery. Whenever something generates so much unreasoned passion, to the point of making threats, I have to wonder about the motives behind it. I mean, they’re lecturing us on the scientific method, while at the same time threatening those who question.
Questioning is the very heart of science. And there is never a time or place when it is inappropriate to question the current scientific paradigm.
Comments:
Post a Comment
