True believers in orthodox beliefs such as catastrophic anthropogenic global warming, have surrendered their critical thought processes to the orthodoxy. It is only the heretics who continue to evaluate the changing dynamics of what is happening in the real world. True believers have willingly blinded themselves to reality, in trust that the leaders of the orthodoxy would surely notify them of any weakening within the pillars of the dogma.
Be grateful for the heretics.
“My first heresy says that all the fuss about global warming is grossly exaggerated. Here I am opposing the holy brotherhood of climate model experts and the crowd of deluded citizens who believe the numbers predicted by the computer models. Of course, they say, I have no degree in meteorology and I am therefore not qualified to speak. But I have studied the climate models and I know what they can do. The models solve the equations of fluid dynamics, and they do a very good job of describing the fluid motions of the atmosphere and the oceans. They do a very poor job of describing the clouds, the dust, the chemistry and the biology of fields and farms and forests. They do not begin to describe the real world that we live in. The real world is muddy and messy and full of things that we do not yet understand. It is much easier for a scientist to sit in an air-conditioned building and run computer models, than to put on winter clothes and measure what is really happening outside in the swamps and the clouds. That is why the climate model experts end up believing their own models.” – Freeman Dyson [World class physicist]
...“I’m a skeptic. …Global Warming it’s become a new religion. You’re not supposed to be against Global Warming. You have basically no choice. And I tell you how many scientists support that. But the number of scientists is not important. The only thing that’s important is if the scientists are correct; that’s the important part.” – Ivar Giaever [Nobel Prize, Physics]
... “The geologic record suggests that climate ought not to concern us too much when we’re gazing into the energy future, not because it’s unimportant, but because it’s beyond our power to control.” – Robert Laughlin [Nobel Prize, Physics]
...“Research data on climate change do not show that human use of hydrocarbons is harmful. To the contrary, there is good evidence that increased atmospheric carbon dioxide is environmentally helpful.” – Frederick Seitz[President Emeritus National Academy of Sciences]
...“The scientific facts indicate that all the temperature changes observed in the last 100 years were largely natural changes and were not caused by carbon dioxide produced in human activities.” – Robert Jastrow [Founder of NASA Goddard Institute of Space Studies]
...“The available data on climate change, however, do not support these predictions, nor do they support the idea that human activity has caused, or will cause, a dangerous increase in global temperatures. …These facts indicate that theoretical estimates of the greenhouse problem have greatly exaggerated its seriousness.” – William Nierenberg [Manhattan Project Member]_ More at Wattsupwiththat
When a science becomes too wrapped up in politics, it loses credibility with thoughtful and eminent members of other sciences and technical fields. True science cannot be harnessed to a political cause, to bolster a pre-determined conclusion. True science follows the evidence wherever it may lead. Political Correctness is simply not in it.
More: Desperate Days for the Warmists
h/t AnthonyWatts
The idea for interested observors is to not be so naive and uninformed. Take the trouble to learn about the hijinks of the high priests of the orthodoxy of climate doom. Big hint: They have not been exonerated. Bigger hint: Trust no one. You are on your own on this one.
I have found that most True Believers won't or can't discuss the science behind Alleged Anthropogenic Global Warming -- they simply say that it is too complex for their silly little minds to understand, so they go with the "concensus".
ReplyDeleteFollow up question -- How do you know there is a concensus?
Yes. They often say they "trust the scientists" or "trust the science." But well after the scientists have shown themselves not worthy of their trust, they continue to trust them.
ReplyDeleteSuch blind, foolish trust is close to suicidal, and certainly dysfunctional.