Monday, March 12, 2007

Global Warming, Evolution, and the End of Science

I was saddened but not surprised to read an article about scientists receiving death threats for questioning the idea that human activity is responsible for global warming. For example, "Timothy Ball, a former climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg in Canada, has received five deaths threats by email since raising concerns about the degree to which man was affecting climate change.

One of the emails warned that, if he continued to speak out, he would not live to see further global warming."

But that is not the scariest thing in my mind. Sure, the threats of the mob can intimidate scientists into silence when the evidence is not to their liking. But governments can do so much more effectively. The article reports increasing instances of scientists losing their funding and being shunned for interpreting the evidence differently from how the government desires them to interpret it. In this case, governments everywhere seem to want them to say that mankind is causing most of global warming because such alarmism will frighten people into giving government offcials increasing power and control of our society.

(continued- click MONDAY below and scroll down for rest of article.)


Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

From the article:

"Western governments have pumped billions of dollars into careers and institutes and they feel threatened," said Dr. Ball.

"I can tolerate being called a sceptic because all scientists should be sceptics, but then they started calling us deniers, with all the connotations of the Holocaust. That is an obscenity. It has got really nasty and personal."

Other well-known skeptics agreed with Ball:

Richard Lindzen, the professor of Atmospheric Science at Massachusetts Institute of Technology - who also appeared on the documentary - recently claimed: "Scientists who dissent from the alarmism have seen their funds disappear, their work derided, and themselves labelled as industry stooges."

"Consequently, lies about climate change gain credence even when they fly in the face of the science."

Dr Myles Allen, from Oxford University, agreed. He said: "The Green movement has hijacked the issue of climate change. It is ludicrous to suggest the only way to deal with the problem is to start micro managing everyone, which is what environmentalists seem to want to do."

Nigel Calder, a former editor of New Scientist, said: "Governments are trying to achieve unanimity by stifling any scientist who disagrees. Einstein could not have got funding under the present system."


OK, these scientists are complaining about the new-PC. You have to say mankind is causing global warming or you can lose your funding, by shunned by the mainstream "scientific community", lose your university job, and maybe even be killed by lunatics. You HAVE to tow the PC line on global warming, even if you are convinced the evidence says otherwise. Even if measurements of solar activity indicates that the Sun is in a warming spell. Even if space probes that measure temps. on the various planets their moons in our solar system indicate they are warming up too- without an SUV in sight.

Scientists are shocked that people would supress open inquiry like this, that a political agenda could hijack science. But they should realize that it is not only happening on the one topic of global warming. The same scenario is being played out in the area of evolution. The increasing doubt scientists have about the theory of evolution as an adequate explaination for the diversity of life on earth is being squelched by government types with an agenda. Judges are among the usual suspects.

What interest to they have in stifling dissent and honest doubt as to the theory? It is odd isn't it. They seem to WANT us to believe that we are a cosmic accident. That we don't owe our existence to anyone, nor is their any power greater than ourselves. That is the main alternative to evolution you see, that we are created beings, which implies a higher power to whom we owe something. And some people in power don't like the idea of a higher power- they want that title for themselves with no accountablility to any transcendent moral standards. If evolution is true, no one can say to their government "what you are doing is WRONG". There is no "wrong" if evolution is true, because we would be a cosmic accident without meaning.

Fortunately, it is not true and the evidence can show that, when that evidence is allowed to be debated. But the same folks who are stifling dissent on global warming are doing it on evolution too. They have hi-jacked science and replaced it with a political agenda. They are not willing to follow the evidence where ever it leads- there is a state supported view, and the state is becoming a jealous god indeed.

7:19 PM, March 12, 2007  
Blogger GOPin08 said...

But wait....what happened to liberals being so "open-minded" towards people? I guess that just goes for people as long as they don't disagree with their point of view. With conservatives, we'll listen to another point of view, and certainly not threaten people with death when they disagree with us. All we do is listen, tell them they're wrong, and go on.

7:52 PM, March 12, 2007  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home