On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 5:19 PM, Edward K. Ream <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 5. The civil rights movement provides a better analogy for the climate
> challenge. Then, as now, entrenched interests vigorously opposed
> change.

In another thread the comment was made that making sense of
conflicting opinions is difficult.  My response then was to focus on
actual evidence.  I always begin the evaluation of an assertion by
considering the motives of those making the statement.  It is amazing
to me how often people don't apply this simple rule.

If someone has a political, financial or personal stake in seeing the
world a certain way, you can assume that the assertions of that person
are dubious.  Some examples:

- The assertions by tobacco companies that cigarettes are safe.
- The assertions by fundamentalist Christians that evolution is false.
- The assertions by Wall Street traders that unregulated markets work best.
- The assertions by industries that emit CO2 that climate change isn't
caused by humans.

Do you see?

Climate skeptics assert that scientists are somehow similarly biases.
That's ludicrous.  Scientific dishonesty results in expulsion from the
scientific community.  Furthermore, proving a popular theory
incomplete (or wrong) is a great way to get scientific honors.
Indeed, science may be the *only* human activity for which rigorous
intellectual honesty is the precondition for advancement and success.
Furthermore, the evaluation of evidence, and indeed the creation of
new *kinds* of evidence if close to the center of scientific
enterprise.  It is science, not philosophy, that is most engaged in
the critique of evidence.

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