A well-informed review of an important book occurs in the October 2010 issue of American Scientist: Robert Proctor (of Stanford U.) on Oreskes & Conway, Merchants of Doubt, about the climate-change deniers. It focuses in particular on the denialist scientists at the George C Marshall Institute.
Yet neither the review, nor most of what you can read in the press, addresses the following purely logical point (that is, valid whatever the meteorological causality of whatever it is that is going on with the atmosphere of our planet): The degree to which various trendlines we observe are anthropogenic may be debated; but symptomatic treatment can be investigated quasi-independently of that matter of dispute.
Yet neither the review, nor most of what you can read in the press, addresses the following purely logical point (that is, valid whatever the meteorological causality of whatever it is that is going on with the atmosphere of our planet): The degree to which various trendlines we observe are anthropogenic may be debated; but symptomatic treatment can be investigated quasi-independently of that matter of dispute.
I have treated the matter here: Climate Change.
Herewith a shorter, more satirical treatment, that may stick better in memory:
Thesis (anthropogenicist hardliner): There’s snow all over our front walks! Some human vandal must have dumped it there!
Antithesis-1 (climate deniers): What snow? I don’t see any snow!
Antithesis-2 (the kept scientists of the Marshall Institute): Hmm-myes. Snow, possibly. But of undetermined upper-atmospheric, possibly extra-terrestrial origin; apparently some sort of cryogenic precipitation. -- Oh quick look over there, a pretty bird!
Synthesis (engineer, pragmatist): Get out your shovels and clear the d*mn walks!
*
For further musings
from this pen,
check here:
*
No comments:
Post a Comment