Beyond the war on science: Why the right embraces ignorance as a virtue

[WarDamJagFan]

The pie chart cited from the Climate Change Communications is only a few months older than the article I highlighted from Forbes. And the article said "since 1998",  not "in 1998".  And regarding Lindzen, he's still regarded as a "denier" because of his beliefs, so obviously he hasn't rescinded much.

[WarDamJagFan]

If you are going to call on the medieval warm period as an example, then don't you have to accept that we are able to gauge the temperatures of the world five hundred years ago?

Isn't that at odds with the claim that we only have knowledge of 130 years of climate?

"Last year was the hottest on earth since record-keeping began in 1880, scientists reported on Friday."   Just going off of the NYT article cited at the beginning.

[I-10east]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Warm_Period

+100

[spuwho]

If you are going to call on the medieval warm period as an example, then don't you have to accept that we are able to gauge the temperatures of the world five hundred years ago?

Isn't that at odds with the claim that we only have knowledge of 130 years of climate?

There is active measurement and there is anecdotal evidence.  The "130 years" is considered active. The medieval period was mostly anecdotal until they did more research on it using known markers from the era.

When I was out at Mendenhall Glacier last summer outside Juneau, AK, they commented that most of its retreat occurred at the end of this warm period based on measurements made by European explorers and local tribal histories.

I read last week (and I am trying to relocate the article) about historic volcanic activities disrupting earth warm/cool cycles due to pre-mature cooling. The recent Icelandic volcanos had a net 1.3 degree reduction in the global warmth.

I don't disagree that global warmth is happening, the stats don't lie. I disagree with the disposition that the causes are solely human originated.

If you walk up to me and say " do you think there is global climate change?" I would answer, "yes of course, the global climate has been changing for millions of years".

If in the same conversation you ask me if it originates with man, I would say its not 100% clear. Climate behaviors has several factors that impact it, man is just one piece of it."

We are still trying to develop computer models to help us understand how and what is changing overall in our climate. With some success we have been able to reach weeks in advance using these models, but they aren't perfect.

It would be interesting to see a computer model of known weather cycles and then enter a Kyoto Protocol variable and see how the models would change. How do the models rank man's contribution?

[spuwho]

Well i think if you delve a little deeper, you will find out that there is pretty considerable data to place weather patterns for many thousands of years, similar to comparing tree rings, the same thing happens in old growth glaciers.

But I find it interesting that people who believe that they can bake bread with yeast and die from microscopic organisms are unable to believe that changing the gas composition of the atmosphere is unable to have dramatic effects.

Point made.

At one time all scientists believed incontrovertibly the world was flat. Anyone who doubted was a heretic.

At one time we used to think the practice of blood letting would rid oneself of illness. Anyone who disputed these doctors were considered quacks.

Research over time was able to clear up the issues and we got the real causes. The research on climate should continue and we should still be better stewards of our resources in the interim.

[finehoe]

At one time all scientists believed incontrovertibly the world was flat.

"All"?  Hardly.

The concept of a spherical Earth dates back to ancient Greek philosophy from around the 6th century BC,[1] but remained a matter of philosophical speculation until the 3rd century BC, when Hellenistic astronomy established the spherical shape of the earth as a physical given

Not to mention calling pre-scientific method thinkers 'scientists'.  The comparison is facile.

[spuwho]

At one time all scientists believed incontrovertibly the world was flat.

"All"?  Hardly.

The concept of a spherical Earth dates back to ancient Greek philosophy from around the 6th century BC,[1] but remained a matter of philosophical speculation until the 3rd century BC, when Hellenistic astronomy established the spherical shape of the earth as a physical given

Not to mention calling pre-scientific method thinkers 'scientists'.  The comparison is facile.

Feeling a little argumentative today are we?

[finehoe]

My turn?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2012/07/17/that-scientific-global-warming-consensus-not/

If you think an article by an architecture professor in a mass-market publication like Forbes is equivalent to 97% of peer-reviewed research papers, then you've pretty much demonstrated the veracity of the premise of the original posting in this thread.

[Rob68]

I see human caused climate change and the denial of scientic proof by many to be the same people who deny that evolution is a real thing..in school we all have students who just dont get it and deny it because of their inability to comprehend or because their church leaders deny it so it must be wrong...its just proof that ignorance is historic...one would think that as time goes on we as a people would have better understanding but remember...children actually believe what their parents tell them and if your parent is a right wing science denier you will most likely believe mommy and daddy over what the proven evidence says...

[Scarlettjax]

On what your parents teach you...my father worked in engineering and taught me the scientific method, above and beyond what the school system provided.  He always asked me - where's the proof, where's the evidence, how do you really know?  While I did not go into a field of work where science is prized, that foundation has served me well over the years.

Unfortunately, he's now in the category of those brainwashed by some of the factors in the popular opinion of the right.  When I ask him the same questions he once asked me, he becomes angry and throws the "liberal" name at me.  Guess I am, if trying to look at the available evidence labels me as such.  It does make me quite sad, though, that we can no longer have conversations about almost anything without a political slant coloring each statement.  If there is anything I miss about the old days, our ability to talk, agree and disagree without becoming angry or dismissive is it.  Same with many internet based discussion, there's little civil discourse left it seems.

[spuwho]

On what your parents teach you...my father worked in engineering and taught me the scientific method, above and beyond what the school system provided.  He always asked me - where's the proof, where's the evidence, how do you really know?  While I did not go into a field of work where science is prized, that foundation has served me well over the years.

Unfortunately, he's now in the category of those brainwashed by some of the factors in the popular opinion of the right.  When I ask him the same questions he once asked me, he becomes angry and throws the "liberal" name at me.  Guess I am, if trying to look at the available evidence labels me as such.  It does make me quite sad, though, that we can no longer have conversations about almost anything without a political slant coloring each statement.  If there is anything I miss about the old days, our ability to talk, agree and disagree without becoming angry or dismissive is it.  Same with many internet based discussion, there's little civil discourse left it seems.

Agree with you Scarlett.

Sometimes I tell people to go watch the first few seasons of an old TV show called " All in the Family".

It triggered so many conversations in our house and at school, and no one would fight over it or call people names. We would simply discuss what it meant. Not so much anymore. It was the most politically incorrect show of its time and today I feel if it was shown, people would spend most of their time trying to define who was liberal and who wasnt. Back then it just wasnt the big deal.

[bill]

So why is not the headline, 2014 unlikely the warmest year EVAH? Because it does not get on the front page, receive research money or fit the agenda. This is why people are skeptical of the "science and scientists". Why change, rush and guess at data when you only want facts? Oh yeah the meeting in Lima/Paris. BTW-these were the unbiased "scientific facts" 40 years ago.

https://html1-f.scribdassets.com/yal7w1ekg3t0s2a/images/1-9c290725b9.jpg

[urbanlibertarian]

It seems to be human nature to take what you believe to be true and seek evidence to support it and reject evidence that contradicts it.  Science is taking what you believe to be true and trying your damnedest to prove it wrong.  Humility is hard work.