On the climate change front, I thought I would collect some favorite bits from the respected "Scientific American" ("SciAm") magazine. Culled from the past five years, they chronicle the ongoing battle between science and the overwhelmingly disgusting collection of vociferous:
people and news-entertainment establishments (e.g., Fox News, talk radio) that have lately seized on a few apparent irregularities in climate change data to feed their appetite for venal rewards and/or blissful, raw ignorance.
- Say-Anything-to-get-Paid-by-the-Big-Money- (the chances are so much better with Big Republican Corporate than Greenfreaks)
For the opening I have these:
. . . technical expertise is largely ignored or bypassed, while expert communities such as climate scientists are falsely and recklessly derided by the Wall Street Journal as a conspiratorial interest group chasing federal grants.
- SciAm article, Feb. 2010
In fact, nothing in the stolen e-mails or computer code undermines in any way the scientific consensus—which exists among scientific publications as well as scientists—that climate change is happening and humans are the cause
- SciAm article, Dec. 2009
Who's really got influence on politics? Oil and gas sector lobbying exceeds environmental lobbying by over seven times:
Oil and gas sector lobbying has more than tripled since 2004, reaching $168.3 million last year, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
. . .
Environmentalists, meanwhile, have increased their lobbying expenditures fourfold during that same period, spending $22.5 million last year.
- SciAm article, March, 2010
And perhaps my favorite, a Rumble in the Jungle that seems to have never come to pass (surprise): Science vs. the Ostrich-, Newt-belly-live-under-rock-, Say-Anything-to-get-Paid-by-the-Big-Money-people:
Only one place seemed to remain cool: the air-conditioned offices of the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal. As New York City wilted beneath them, they sat insouciant and comfortable, hurling editorials of stunning misdirection at their readers, continuing their irresponsible drumbeat that global warming is junk science.
. . .
Let me make the invitation once again. Many of the world's leading climate scientists are prepared to meet with the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal, and to include in that meeting any climate-skeptic scientists that that the Journal editorial board would like to invite. The board owes it to the rest of us to make the effort to their own "open-minded search for scientific knowledge." If only for the sake of their own sweltering hometown, it's time they accept the invitation.
- "Fiddling While the Planet Burns", SciAm Editorial, Oct. 2006
At this point, only a surge in mass irrationality focused solidly against science could blunt the drive towards collective survival by addressing climate change. Yet, with the Tea Baggers, that seems what is coming to pass. Perhaps the Rumble is finally on. In fact, just two days ago, according to an ABC News article, "Scientists Decry "Assaults" on Climate Research":
At this point, only a surge in mass irrationality focused solidly against science could blunt the drive towards collective survival by addressing climate change. Yet, with the Tea Baggers, that seems what is coming to pass.
Perhaps the Rumble is finally on. In fact, just two days ago, according to an ABC News article, "Scientists Decry "Assaults" on Climate Research":
More than 250 U.S. scientists on Thursday defended climate change research against "political assaults" and warned that any delay in tackling global warming heightens the risk of a planet-wide catastrophe.