Tuesday, February 06, 2007
in this article. Ball devotes much of the space to arguing that this consensus is not real, but also laments the state of the academy that produced it.
Of course, consensus (as he acknowledges) is not essential or even terribly important in scientific matters (such things are not decided by juries, after all, they either are or are not), but the fact that 1000 or so scientists agree on something would seem to have some significance beyond the media's love of reporting on it. This, however, returns us to the question of how the consensus was built, and thus the state of the academy that Ball discusses. I'm not adding anything new here, just setting up the piece, which happens to mention Richard Lindzen. Lindzen is one of the best known global warming skeptics in the U.S. Have you heard of him? No? Well, there you go.
I believe this is where I paste a teaser, so I will use his intro (say what you will, the guy doesn't need any self-esteem boosting, and in this day and age we know that self-esteem is important):
Global Warming, as we think we know it, doesn't exist. And I am not the only one trying to make people open up their eyes and see the truth. But few listen, despite the fact that I was the first Canadian Ph.D. in Climatology and I have an extensive background in climatology, especially the reconstruction of past climates and the impact of climate change on human history and the human condition. Few listen, even though I have a Ph.D, (Doctor of Science) from the University of London, England and was a climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg. For some reason (actually for many), the World is not listening. Here is why.
20,000 scientists: yes, global warming is happening, and yes we are contributing in large part.
3 nutballs: no, it can't be
Nope, no consensus here.
Yes, thank you. You really contributed to the discussion by calling then nutballs. I admire your courage.Post a Comment
Did you even read the article linked to?