Despite claims of overwhelming consensus, crystal clarity and so on, there is no shortage of dissenting voices.
The truth is the debate about the science of global warming has been taken over by the politicians and their placemen.
There are too many of examples of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change trying to suppress dissenting voices, and it isn't the only one.
Recently, Britain's Royal Society wrote to Exxon Mobil demanding that it cease funding for groups that "misrepresented" the science of climate change by denying the evidence. This is appalling behaviour by a supposed premier scientific academy. Since when has science proceeded by enforced consensus, other than when controlled by the church or state? Too often the dissenters have proved right.
Particularly objectionable is the use of the term climate change denier to describe dissenting voices: a deliberate attempt to draw a parallel with Holocaust deniers. Indeed, the parallel has been made explicit by various green extremists.
The truth is neither the science nor the economics of global warming is settled. The increasingly shrill attempts to suppress critics suggests a rising insecurity in the carriages of the global warming gravy train, and the exposure of the dubious economics of the Stern review can only increase it.
Maybe more folks will get on the bandwagon and back the radical notion of free inquiry, but in this day where everything is viewed as an extension of politics I tend to doubt it.
Just chalk it down to another wonderful legacy left to us all by the Baby Boomers.
Yeah, thanks a lot.
No comments:
Post a Comment