"It's a numbingly familiar pattern in media coverage. The conservative movement that's been attacking climate science for 20 years has a storied history of demonstrable fabrications, distortions, personal attacks, and nothingburger faux-scandals -- not only on climate science, but going back to asbestos, ozone, leaded gasoline, tobacco, you name it. They don't follow the rigorous standards of professional science; they follow no intellectual or ethical standards whatsoever. Yet no matter how long their record of viciousness and farce, every time the skeptic blogosphere coughs up a new "ZOMG!" it's as though we start from zero again, like no one has a memory longer than five minutes.
"Here's the basic question: At this point, given their respective accomplishments and standards, wouldn't it make sense to give scientists the strong benefit of the doubt when they are attacked by ideologues with a history of dishonesty and error? Shouldn't the threshold for what counts as a "scandal" have been nudged a bit higher?"
4 comments:
Nice. Not one citation as to the alleged misdeeds of those wascally "deniers;" nothing but an ad hominem attack on those with whom Mr. Roberts disagrees. What IS indisputable is that the so-called "Climate Scientists," Messers. Mann & Jones conspired to silence opinions dissenting from the Climate Change (sic) orthodoxy, destroyed data (whether intentionally or not), and ignored legal and binding requests for information. Subsequent white-washings by their respective employers (which obviously had a conflict of interest in conducting the investigations) notwithstanding, these two engaged in the kind of shenanigans that usually result in incarceration, disgrace, and penury. But not when you are an acolyte in the one true religion: Global Warming!!
Several investigations, no significant wrongdoing found. The evidence does not seem to support your position.
It's OK. Lots of people get religion and science confused.
You are correct. The definition of a religion is a collection of people who believe in things for which there is no evidence. This is a perfect description of Climate Change (sic). Of course the world is getting warmer; it has been doing that for about 18,000 years. But sometimes it gets really warm, like it was in the 1400s, and then gets colder again, like it did during the "Mini Ice-Age" in the 1700s. All of this before mankind started burning fossil fuels. Since there is no evidence that mankind is affecting the climate, the only thing that you can accurately call Climate Change (sic) is a religion. And it is a religion where the priests will do anything to silence the apostates. The money and the power is just so damned good.
As for the so-called investigations, they were run by the institutions where these mountebanks worked, which receive tens of millions of dollars in government grants to study Climate Change (sic). This would be like putting Charlie Sheen's porn-star girlfriend in charge of the investigation of his drug use.
And my original point is unaddressed: Mr. Robert's screed is an ad hominem attack on the apostates with no supporting evidence.
I am always amused when scientists are attacked for the millions they make. I guess it's not an ad hominem attack, just a silly one. They're doing research, they would get paid their salaries no matter what they found. But it's nice to have villains in a conspiracy theory.
Post a Comment