cleIMC home

Cleveland Indy Media Center

cleveland indymedia
About Us Contact Us Subscribe Calendar Radio Show Publish
white themeblack themered themeblack themeblack themeblack themeblack themeblack themeblack themeblack themetheme help

Sep 20 Real Time Presentation Service from Money Maker Ma

Sep 25 Columbus Socialism Forum -- Why You Should Vote So

Add an Event

printable version - email this article

Arguments of Those Unconcerned About Global Warming
by tyler Sunday February 01, 2004 at 12:55 AM

Section 3 of Perspectives on Global Warming: A Primer

Arguments of Those Unconcerned About Global Warming

Some scientists, including prominent members of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a collaboration between the World Meteorological Organization and the United Nations Environment Programme, believe that human activities are not increasing the greenhouse effect at all, or that climate change will have primarily neutral or even positive effects.

Climate scientists who have come to the conclusion that global warming is not a threat criticize those who are concerned as being unscientific in their methods, relying on guesswork and scientific dogma rather than the hard logic and irrefutable evidence normally called for by the science community. Climate is an extremely difficult object of study, because it is extremely complex, and they believe that the current computer models are wildly innaccurate, and that the study of climate, which ought to be as objective as any other science, is being overridden by questionable environmentalist ideologies. As author Michael Crichton states,

Nobody believes a weather prediction twelve hours ahead. Now we're asked to believe a prediction that goes out 100 years into the future? And make financial investments based on that prediction? Has everybody lost their minds?

They are also highly critical of the work of the IPCC, claiming that science is not about consensus, but objective truth. They remind us that throughout history, the brilliant scientists who spoke against the consensus of the scientific community have subsequently been celebrated for their genius and scientific integrity. In general, they are dissapointed by what they see as politics dominating and steering science, much as the church prevented real science from being conducted in the past. Crichton also states,

As the twentieth century drew to a close, the connection between hard scientific fact and public policy became increasingly elastic. In part this was possible because of the complacency of the scientific profession; in part because of the lack of good science education among the public; in part, because of the rise of specialized advocacy groups which have been enormously effective in getting publicity and shaping policy; and in great part because of the decline of the media as an independent assessor of fact.
A significant number of scientists contest the claims of the threat of global warming because they feel the evidence for it is weak, if not outright false, and they feel the entire scientific community, which once prided itself on its objectivity, is being dominated by policy-makers and lobby groups to form theories as part of environmentalist public relations efforts.


Other Articles about Global Warming:

add your comments

IMC Network: Projects print radio satellite tv video Africa ambazonia canarias estrecho / madiaq nigeria south africa Canada hamilton maritimes montreal ontario ottawa quebec thunder bay vancouver victoria windsor winnipeg East Asia burma jakarta japan manila qc Europe alacant andorra antwerpen armenia athens austria barcelona belarus belgium belgrade bristol bulgaria croatia cyprus estrecho / madiaq euskal herria galiza germany grenoble hungary ireland istanbul italy la plana liege lille madrid malta marseille nantes netherlands nice norway oost-vlaanderen paris/île-de-france poland portugal romania russia scotland sverige switzerland thessaloniki toulouse ukraine united kingdom valencia west vlaanderen Latin America argentina bolivia brasil chiapas chile chile sur colombia ecuador mexico peru puerto rico qollasuyu rosario santiago tijuana uruguay valparaiso Oceania adelaide aotearoa brisbane burma darwin jakarta manila melbourne oceania perth qc sydney South Asia india mumbai United States arizona arkansas atlanta austin baltimore big muddy binghamton boston buffalo charlottesville chicago cleveland colorado danbury, ct dc hawaii houston hudson mohawk idaho ithaca kansas city la madison maine miami michigan milwaukee minneapolis/st. paul new hampshire new jersey new mexico new orleans north carolina north texas nyc oklahoma omaha philadelphia pittsburgh portland richmond rochester rogue valley saint louis san diego san francisco san francisco bay area santa barbara santa cruz, ca seattle tallahassee-red hills tampa bay tennessee united states urbana-champaign utah vermont virginia beach western mass worcester West Asia armenia beirut israel palestine ukraine Topics biotech Process discussion fbi/legal updates indymedia faq mailing lists process & imc docs tech volunteer

© 2000-2006 Cleveland Indy Media Center. Unless otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for non-commercial reuse, reprint, and rebroadcast, on the net and elsewhere. Opinions are those of the contributors and are not necessarily endorsed by the Cleveland Indy Media Center. Running sf-active v0.9.4 Disclaimer | Privacy