Wednesday, September 12, 2007

Global Warming as New Age Apocalypse?

Pollution and smog are bad, and nobody should leave their lights on when they leave the house because it's wasteful, and we shouldn't destroy the rainforest, and polar bears sure are cute... but still. Again, I really think.


Monica said...

Huh, well then, take that, Al Gore.

Insignificant Wrangler said...

Really interesting read. I've been copyediting a book on how scientific myths perpetuate themselves in the public sphere despite scientific evidence to the otherwise (although the book cites second-hand smoke, which, apparently isn't nearly as bad for us as we've been led to assume...).

So I gues one must assume that the myth of global warming is perpetuated in order to reinforce other truths? As motivation to recycle and turn those lights off? I don't know if that bothers me, really. Perhaps the end justifies the means?

And, of course, being the obstinate ass that I can be, I'd still like to know how many scientists do believe that global warming is a product of industrialization. 500, in isolation sounds like a lot, but put it next to 5000 and...

Casey said...

I knew that about second-hand smoke, Santos.

Considering "other truths." I've thought about this much... here's a test (sorry, I only think in story):

Imagine that it were suddenly proven that CO2 actually somehow helped the environment, and that all we would need to do is build more smoking factories and drive our cars more vigorously to help the environment...

In that case, do you think those people who currently identify themselves as "environmentalists" would simply become free-marketing libertarian pro-business types? If you give them that much credit, then their motives might not be suspect... but if you think they'd pretty much shut up and never mention the environment again (and that the next time you'd see them they'd be at an anti-sweat-shop rally), then feel free to join the suspicion bandwagon.

And as I've said before, I really do love nature, and hope we can keep it clean. I'm not even in favor of globalizing business, etc. I just don't appreciate the way "science" has been corrupted by political causes and influences.

And your last point is dead on. I might be WAY off on all of this -- I don't read scientific journals or hang around in laboratories.

***One more point: if we can't begin differentiating between "science" and science pretty soon, I worry for Science.