Whether I am an uneducated moron has nothing to do with my failure to fall into lock-step with a particular ideology.
It’s true...I don’t have as much formal education as I might like. But, perhaps I have little enough to allow me to still think for myself.
I very seldom...follow the crowd, unless I can prove to my satisfaction that the crowd is on the right track. I never act out of hysteria.
“Science” is never, ever served by hysteria or consensus...when “science” is founded on either, it usually produces error. Science has time and again “proven” certain things...until someone comes along, having learned something new and “proves” the earlier theory wrong. Take for example the argument on the age of Earth. At one time, within the last couple of centuries, Earth has gone from being 6000 years old to the current belief that it is 4.5-5 billion years old. As more is learned...that age will undoubtedly change. 200 years ago...plate tectonics was unheard of and was ridiculed at first, now, it is “fact”. My point is, something can only remain “proven” until/unless someone learns something new. I see very little in computer modeling that is science...unless the inputs into that model, and all reactions to those inputs, are without error...the outcome has no choice but to be flawed. For every new study that comes down the pike that "proves” global warming...there is another contradicting it. I tend to err on the side of reason, not panic. Science is...speculation, then proving or disproving that speculation. By it’s very nature, science is fallible. Scientist are human and so are also fallible. Plenty can be hypothesized, very little can actually be proven.
Now...as I said earlier, since Earth was created...the overall trend is toward cooling. Since man, and his immediate predecessors, has been on the planet...the climate, with few exceptions has remained temperate. True? The exceptions that I am aware of are a few brief, in geological terms, periods of extreme cooling. In the olden days (the 70's) “all” the scientists were convinced there was an impending ice age, some are now reviving those theories. What I find amusing is...the “remedies” for global cooling are exactly the same ones that are being touted as mankind’s only hope to avoid a global inferno.
Now...if I am wrong and Earth’s climate is getting warmer, although there is evidence that a brief warming trend in the 80's and 90's has ended, I “believe” that the universe we live in has more to do with that change (I believe it’s all cyclical) than anything man has done or could do. Volcanoes have more to do with “pollution” than man does. Differing levels of salinity in the oceans has more effect on climate than man does. Solar activity has a very strong cyclical effect on climate...much more than anything man has done.
While man has been on Earth, the times of hardship, disease and famine have for the most part been associated with cooler, wetter climates. The times of plenty and prosperity have been warmer climates. If the climate does warm, long term, who is to say it will be bad? A longer growing season in Canada might help feed more people. Warmth increases evaporation, which may bring more rain to areas of the world that need it now. More people die from exposure to cold every year than die from exposure to heat (not counting fires).
I’m more concerned about the probability of another attack on America than global warming. I’m more concerned about half of Cumbre Vieja sliding into the Atlantic and causing a huge tsunami. I’m more concerned about an object from space impacting the Earth. But...I’m not all that worried about any of those things. All in all, I’d rather live in a world that is a little warmer than under a glacier.
It’s not so much that I’m a global warming denier...more that I discount it’s probability.
Poll
