It may well be a cancer on the body politic. It's a cancer that may prove to be fatal to our way of life.
The mantra today is to "believe the science" with respect to what we're being told about climate change. While this may be good politics, it has nothing much to do with science. The politics of the issue says that the institutions of science are still highly-regarded, so the magic word "science" can be invoked, and the people are fooled yet again. Therefore, it's the politics, not the science.
But what does the science say? Can the public be warned in time? The politics of "climate change" will prove deadly in the years to come unless the warning goes out, and this madness is stopped in time to save us. For we need rescue from the politicians, not from the so-called poison of carbon dioxide.
There appears to be confusion. If science teaches us anything, it should teach us a healthy respect for the truth. In case you haven't noticed, politicians aren't necessarily reliable when it comes to the truth. Beware the politics of climate change, for the "disease" may not be truly a disease, and the "cure" isn't going to do anybody much good.
If you are going to believe the science, then stick to the science. The confusion is in who speaks for science. The scientists themselves or the politicians? If the politicians are controlling the scientists through the use of the public treasury, it is the same as the politicians doing the talking themselves. In other words, it's the science that has to speak, not the spokesmen for science that the politicians control. If you are going to listen to the "science", then listen to the science, not people purportedly speaking for science. For these people have a political agenda that has nothing to do with science at all. Money may talk, but talk isn't always the truth.
In the study of the issue here on this blog, it has been deduced that basic science as it was taught in high school can refute the entire premise of climate change. If that is true, then how can science be the guide? Something else is at work here, and it isn't science.
Such basic scientific basics such as the Universal Gas Law, Thermodynamics, and high school math have been put forth here as irrefutable truth that climate science is bunk. Do people who talk about this issue even discuss the science of the issue? Let's take the term "temperature" for example. If climate science is about anything, it is about temperature. Well, do people even discuss what temperature actually is? What does science say about what temperature is?
Common sense will tell you when something is hot. You don't want to put your hands on a red hot stove. But common sense itself can help you refute the proposition of AGW. It has been done here, but is anybody paying attention?
So who do you listen to? The politicians? Or spokesmen for science, who may be getting paid to say what they say, and do not represent science, but someone else's interests? Or do you listen to your own reason, education, and interests? For if the average voter were to do more of that, we may be able to avoid a catastrophe.
No comments:
Post a Comment