Wednesday, September 07, 2011
The New York Times Finds Our Lack of Faith Disturbing
Today in an unsigned opinion piece the NYT calls the Republican Presidential candidates "in denial" for being sceptical of alarmist Warmie true believers' claims of a CO2 Armageddon just around the corner.
The single out Gov. Rick Perry for the major rebuke, saying:
Then they praise non-entity candidate Gov. Jon Huntsman for swallowing one of the greatest scientific hoaxes ever perpetrated.
The investigations referenced were largely shams (You can't pull Mike's Nature trick to hide the decline and then claim to be an honest scientist) and the scientific consensus is not nearly as solid as the NYT supposes. But consensus is all it touts as a reason to call sceptics "in denial." Behold:
Your theory or explanation is either right or wrong--that a million people, even those with some knowledge, believe it does not change a wrong thing into a right thing. Indeed, the very essence of the scientific approach to the universe is scepticism. Show me why what you say is right; don't just repeat 'most scientists believe this' and fail completely to provide any proof. The Warmie true believers won't debate. They say "It is known." and revert to ad hominem attacks. To me at least that is not at all convincing.
As the sham of alarming anthropogenic global warming becomes ever more apparent, the NYT seems the one entity involved in its article to be actually in denial.
The single out Gov. Rick Perry for the major rebuke, saying:
Never mind that nearly all the world’s scientists regard global warming as a serious threat to the planet, with human activities like the burning of fossil fuels a major cause. Never mind that multiple investigations have found no evidence of scientific manipulation.
Then they praise non-entity candidate Gov. Jon Huntsman for swallowing one of the greatest scientific hoaxes ever perpetrated.
The investigations referenced were largely shams (You can't pull Mike's Nature trick to hide the decline and then claim to be an honest scientist) and the scientific consensus is not nearly as solid as the NYT supposes. But consensus is all it touts as a reason to call sceptics "in denial." Behold:
Consensus in science is worth exactly nothing. It was the consensus of the world's scientists that the Earth was the center of the universe around which all the planets, the sun, stars and moon all revolved. In my lifetime, I have watched the scientific consensus change so that floating continents went from dead wrong to dead right in about a decade. The recent CERN experiments have started a similar process regarding cosmic rays and clouds.
With one exception — make that one-and-one-half — the rest of the Republican presidential field also rejects the scientific consensus.
Your theory or explanation is either right or wrong--that a million people, even those with some knowledge, believe it does not change a wrong thing into a right thing. Indeed, the very essence of the scientific approach to the universe is scepticism. Show me why what you say is right; don't just repeat 'most scientists believe this' and fail completely to provide any proof. The Warmie true believers won't debate. They say "It is known." and revert to ad hominem attacks. To me at least that is not at all convincing.
As the sham of alarming anthropogenic global warming becomes ever more apparent, the NYT seems the one entity involved in its article to be actually in denial.
Labels: Global Warming Hoax
# posted by Roger Fraley @ 8:11 AM 
