On Nov 15, 5:19 pm, "Edward K. Ream" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 1. The strong scientific consensus on the causes and risks of climate
> change stands in stark contrast to widespread confusion and
> complacency among the public.

This single sentence (the first sentence of the article) should make
any global warming skeptic extremely uncomfortable.  The reason is its
context: it appears in a highly respected peer-reviewed scientific
journal.  This statement **could not appear** in Science magazine if
there substantial doubt that it was true.  The editors and anonymous
reviewers would not allow it.

It is, in essence, an assertion that there is *no* real debate about
the overall truth that human beings are causing serious global climate
change.  It is, to put it bluntly, an assertion that climate change
deniers such as Michael Crichton are crackpots.  There no polite way
to put it.

My assertion is easily verified by reading a year's worth of Science
magazine.  There is *lots* of debate about technical details about
dozens of climate-related subjects, but *none* of this debate gives
any comfort to the Michael Crichton's of this world.  The dog isn't
barking.

What must be (and are) the inevitable responses of climate change
skeptics?

1. A preposterous assertion that there is a global conspiracy or bias
among scientists.  I'll discuss this in more detail when I discuss
motives in regard to sentence 5.

2. A complete refusal to confront the *overwhelming* evidence that
disproves the assertions of climate skeptics.

3. A focus on trivia areas of confusion while ignoring the totality of
scientific agreement.

4. A focus on irrelevancies such as "alarmism" among scientist who,
yes, are truly alarmed.

5. What I call "bozo epistemology", a spurious attempt at
sophistication based on attempts to show that we really don't
understand anything.

Exactly the same tactics are employed by those who deny smoking causes
cancer, by those who deny the Holocaust happened, by those who deny
that free markets require some regulation in order not to collapse,
and by those who deny the truth of evolution.  These tactics amount to
bad faith.  They are contemptible.

Edward
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to