Clan Webb

…is that Al Gore is wrong. It’s bad enough to use junk science to back up your theories. It’s bad enough to attempt to create panic to justify bigger government. It’s downright lying to claim that there is no opposition to your conclusions. Al Gore (and many others) do just that.

This article in the Wall Street Journal by Professor Richard Lindzen at MIT makes the point well. Here’s the summary that nails the problem clearly:

So what, then, is one to make of this alleged debate? I would suggest at least three points.

First, nonscientists generally do not want to bother with understanding the science. Claims of consensus relieve policy types, environmental advocates and politicians of any need to do so. Such claims also serve to intimidate the public and even scientists–especially those outside the area of climate dynamics. Secondly, given that the question of human attribution largely cannot be resolved, its use in promoting visions of disaster constitutes nothing so much as a bait-and-switch scam. That is an inauspicious beginning to what Mr. Gore claims is not a political issue but a “moral” crusade.

Lastly, there is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition. An earlier attempt at this was accompanied by tragedy. Perhaps Marx was right. This time around we may have farce–if we’re lucky.

These people are truly unbelievable. They simply claim something that isn’t true and expect that nobody will point it out to them. And, they do this while proclaiming a “moral” crusade!

This entry was posted on Sunday, July 2nd, 2006 at 4:58 pm by Wyatt and is filed under Opinion. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.