Posted by
The Proud Liberal on Saturday, November 03, 2007 9:24:58 AM
Within the Global Warming debate there are a number of very prominent and credible scientists who have declared their beliefs that global warming is not caused by human activities. They line up on "the science is not yet settled" side of the debate, believing that greenhouse gasses are only a minor contributor to the warming of the earth, but also declaring that more science needs to be done as well. The scientists who take this position have been called "deniers," and there are claims that they are widely disparaged by the believers that global warming is man made. Yet, these deniers are among the most prominent scientists in the world. They have been heartily endorsed and embraced by conservatives who believe that man made global warming is "junk science." Conservatives may claim that the deniers actually practice better science that the "man made global warming scientists.
The folly of conservatives is not that they have embraced one group of scientists over another. Your folly is that you have embraced any scientists at all, for you have now committed to taking science seriously and taking the methods and results of science seriously.
For, while the science behind global warming may be "not settled," I believe that conservatives will find that the science behind evolution and the ages of the universe and the earth are far, far, far more settled. There is almost unanimous agreement among scientists that Darwinian evolution is a fact. Sure, there may be a few scientists, even prominent scientists, who remain skeptical, but they are very few.
One of the global warming denier scientists is a French scientist who 20 years ago was a leading believer in man made global warming but later changed his mind. He is among the most prominent scientists in the world. He is routinely cited as someone whose views carry a great deal of weight in the denial of man made global warming. Yet, Dr. Alegre is known scientifically for his work in showing that the atmosphere of earth developed very early in earth's history, i.e., our atmostphere was not present from the very beginning. He is also prominent in the science about the evolution of mountains and the earth's crust, which were, also, not instantly created whole and finished.
Conservatives, if you are able to recognize it, should know that you have created a dilemma for yourselves by embracing the science of the deniers of man made global warming. For that is what they do. The do science and their conclusions are based on the science that they do, not on politics or emotion or ideology.
So, how do conservatives retain any claim to credibility if they now turn around and deny the well settled science
of Darwinian evolution. How do conservatives prevent the conclusion that they will embrace science which fits their preconceived ideological, emotional beliefs and deny the science which doesn't fit their preconceived ideological, emotional beliefs?
It's a conundrum.