Sites and campaigns like "Friends of Science" drive me nuts because they're complete bullshit. I pride myself on always listening to both sides of an argument and trying to understand where other people are coming from. I also have no tolerance for attempts to swindle and lie to people who may not have the tools to tell the difference between truth and make-believe. There is absolutely no question that climate change is real and moving more quickly because of humans. NO QUESTION. Trying to claim differently is like trying to say that evolution never happened: sure, it's possible to contrive evidence to say that God put humans into the mix with the dinos, but all credible findings prove (as far as a science can prove) that that just isn't the case. So those wackos...no, worse...liars can take their site and made-up information and shove it.
That being said, there is a lot of room for debate once you accept that anthropogenicly motivated climate change is happening. While I personally think it's iresponsable, there is a valid argument that says that we should worry less about mitigating the problem and more about developing technologies to deal with the consequences. There's also a valid argument that human development and economies should come before environmental concerns (again, I don't agree). This debate is really valuble and really important, in that it forces different elements of the environmental and periphery movements to cooperate and or at least consider each other's positions.
Obviously I hold more stock with the Grist articles because it takes the lies of climate sceptics and attempts to disprove them. As always, it's necessary to regard these critiques critically, as many of them are written by environmental bloggers, who tend represet a "social greens" perspective. When looking at any opinions, scientific or activist in nature, the reader is bequeathed with the responsibility to think for themselves.
No comments:
Post a Comment