3 ms·
Here's my problem with the climate debate: statements like "politicians refuse to acknowledge facts" implies that the facts are not in question, but then there
by sverige 10y ago
Here's my problem with the climate debate: statements like "politicians refuse to acknowledge facts" implies that the facts are not in question, but then there are other scientists who say the data are skewed or insufficient or otherwise unreliable. There are also scientists (perhaps some of them the same people, perhaps not - I haven't paid close enough attention) whose theory is that climate change is driven much more by the solar cycle rather than human activity.
From there, it typically descends into the sort of courtroom contest where "my expert is better than your expert" because of all the politics involved. One side says we must radically change the foundations of society and the economy or the world will end, the other side says it's not a big problem and it's been happening since forever.
Any discussion by a layperson of these things results in the worst sort of internet crap, particularly if it seems to dispute the "facts" that seem to be undisputed to one side but not to the other.
So it's not just politicians who "refuse to acknowledge facts," it's also a lot of ordinary people who are skeptical when those facts are not undisputed, nor the theory that frames them, and then those who say it is so demand policy changes that disrupt their entire lives. Ask anyone from coal country if you don't believe me.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- phaemon 10y ago> There are also scientists (perhaps some of them the same people, perhaps not - I haven't paid close enough attention) whose theory is that climate change is driven much more by the solar cycle rather than human activity. Well isn't that a problem with you rather than the debate? If you honestly can't tell the difference between a scientist and someone who is insane, then what can anyone, other than yourself, do about that? It won't matter what evidence they produce since you won't be able to tell if they're just making it up entirely. Oh, and no, no-one sane thinks the current global warming is due to the solar cycle. It wouldn't make any sense.
- brockers 10y agoI assume your comment was intended to prove his point. Attack the person instead of discuss and debate the issue??!?
- phaemon 10y agoI didn't attack him in any way. He said he couldn't tell the difference between a normal scientist and an insane one. He said that, not me. Where do you see me attacking him?
- sverige 10y agoWell, I missed the flagged comment, but from the follow up I assume you think that one group of scientists are "normal" and the other are "insane." I won't speculate on which side (or sides, since I can think of at least three groups from what I've read) is which. Most of this reminds me of the pope vs. Galileo. Dogma on one side, open inquiry and discussion on the other. I won't say which is which either.
- phaemon 10y agoEDIT: Oops! My mistake, I misread your comment. I thought you said "perhaps some of them are sane people, perhaps not". Sorry! Forget all the talk of sanity! Removed rest of comment as it doesn't make any sense to continue this.