Global Climate Change
Posted by Sal on February 25, 2008
Global Climate Change is happening. To deny that the climate is changing is to deny science itself. Virtually 100% of climatologists argue that the Earth’s climate is undergoing change. I fully support this argument, as it is based on sound scientific analysis and factual data. Where I disagree, however, is the idea of man-made global warming and the hysteria surrounding it.
The earth’s climate has been in-flux since its origins 4.5 billion years ago, and during many points of Earth’s history, the change was much more drastic than any changes we are seeing today. In Europe during the late middle ages, the “Little Ice Age” caused famine, death, and disease (note to liberals — there were no SUVs around during the late middle ages). In fact, many climatologists attribute the recent warming trends to the end of that Little Ice Age. It is more likely that we’ll end up in another little ice age, and possibly a great ice age, than it is that we’ll burn up the planet.
Case in point: This past January was .03 degrees C lower than the average temperature of the 20th century, and the loweset since 1966. There is also evidence that the arctic glaciers have actually increased by 10 to 20 cm. Climatologists are now rethinking their models to take into account variables that they had not before considered.
What does all this tell us? The science around global warming is far from certain. The hype and hysteria is well beyond the actual scientific data, based on computer models and collected data that is less than 40 years old (which is a drop in the bucket in climate terms). Yet the media, politicians, and quasi-scientists are still pushing the global warming hysteria to reach a philosophical and political end.
Factions of science have become a new religion of the 20th century. The modern scientific theocracy now exhibits many of the same qualities and characteristics of its own reformation critics. Skeptics of particular theories, whether it is global warming or Darwinian natural selection, are ex-communicated from the scientific community, even when they have data to back it up. Yet unlike religions, it does not admit that it’s precepts are based on faith. It claims that it is “scientific” or that there is “evidence”, even when a close examination shows said evidence to be missing or flawed. In the end, the science theocracy is doing more to damage true scientific inquiry than its critics are. The religion of science has taken hold, and no matter what the evidence suggests, if you want to remain a member in good-standing, you’d better drink the kool-aid.