So there was "scientific consensus" back in the 1970's that the earth was cooling and at risk of a new ice age. Today we're told that there is "scientific consensus" that the earth is warming and at risk of multiple disasters.
This view is actually an amalgam of claims: 1) Temperature of the globe is rising as a long-term trend, 2) It's caused by human activity, 3) Its effect on earth is bad, 4) Politicians must make drastic economic changes.
That's an awful lot to agree on, not to mention the fact that point #4 is not even science but rather policy. Politicians, not scientists, make policy - which is simply an answer of what to do with information.
PC speech has labeled scientists with dissenting views as "deniers" (as in holocaust deniers). That's pretty strident rhetoric for science, since dissenters usually spearhead scientific progress.
The whole thing is complicated.
(cont'd tomorrow)
No comments:
Post a Comment