The Illusion in Attacks, Part 3

This entry is part 11 of 47 in the series Blog1

Global Warming/Climate Change

Where are the Deniers?

One of the things real scientists are fussy about is precision in the use of their words.  If in doubt just read a biology textbook or a treatise on nuclear physics. They insist on being able to give an exact representation of what they are presenting so they will not be misunderstood.  If they do not have a word that accurately describes a concept, particle or species they will make one up almost immediately to make sure their papers can accurately communicate to readers.

One might even say that the prime directive of science is to: “Communicate accurately to insure understanding.” Instead of saying “subatomic particle” the physicist may more accurately say he is talking about a lepton, and instead of a lepton he may more precisely say he is talking about a “tau neutrino” of the lepton family.

No one violated this prime directive of precise scientific communication more than the Left and with no subject are they in more egregious violation than global warming – ironically, a subject where they claim scientific superiority.

And how do they violate this prime directive?

By the first words out of their mouth in a conversation with the Right about the subject.  And what is that? It is often one of the following:

“You are a global warming denier…”

“You are a climate change denier…”

“All scientists agree…”

“The science is settled, the debate is over…”

“You are a flat earther…”

Let us start with the last accusation first.  I included this statement because it represents the unscientific approach of name-calling. Can you imagine a physicist calling a colleague a flat earther because he doesn’t believe the Higgs boson particle will be discovered? Instead, the real scientist would present his reasons for his belief and normally respect the other guy’s opinion, especially if he can make a case for it.

People normally result to name calling when they are lacking intellectual substance or knowledge.

Now let us look at the first accusation:

“You are a global warming denier…”

All science aside this is an extremely insulting term no matter how you look at it. This was designed to create illusionary guilt by association, comparing skeptics with the notorious Holocaust deniers. This implies that if one doesn’t go along with orthodox global warming theory that he is associated with the greatest crime in the history of the planet.

What if the Right had control of the major media and used this same obscene tactic? They could popularize the Left as:

“Rights of babies in the womb deniers…”

“Balanced budget deniers…”

“Free speech deniers…”

(They try to silence Fox News and talk radio)

“Nuclear power deniers…”

Since nuclear power has proven to be the most viable solution to decrease CO2 the Left could be called…

“CO2 reduction deniers…”

Or maybe the term global warming denier could be shot right back at them.

The Left is indeed fortunate that, with the assistance of the media, they have been able to escape such an intensely mean spirited label with which they have tagged the Right.

I am personally infuriated and outraged when anyone tries to associate my sincere skepticism with the greatest crime in history for there is no greater enemy of Nazi-like tyranny than myself.

Now let us put aside the outrageous insult and ask if the statement is true or valid. The answer is that it is much too vague to place any validity on it.  If some one accuses me of being a global warming denier I must ask them what it is I am supposed to be denying. What time period is involved? If we are comparing the Medieval Warm Period to today then there has been cooling. If we are talking about the last century then, yes, there has been about a degree centigrade of warming. But if we use 1998 as a baseline then warming has pretty much flatlined.

In two of the time periods one could logically argue that there is no warming and in the second one could argue there is global warming.

The Left deceptively gives no parameters but just lashes out with one extremely broad brush that all skeptics are global warming deniers.  No further details or explanation is needed by them to brand us in the same category as Holocaust denier Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Calling a skeptic such as myself, who accepts reasonably confirmed data on global temperatures, a global warming denier is like calling the man on the street a sun denier when he acknowledges the sun is in the sky or a Mars denier when he is pretty sure that Mars does exist.

Insulting over half the population of the United States because they are skeptical of some aspects of orthodox global warming is not only mean spirited but just not very smart and certainly not something a assiduous scientist would do.

Because global warming has come close to flatlining since 1998 many of the general populace have made fun of the concept. Partially to avoid the embarrassment of promoting something that many legitimately believe to be not true the orthodox global warming bunch decided it was a good idea to replace the term “global warming” with “climate change.”

And why did they make this change?

The answer is simple.  Sometimes global temperatures go up and other times they go down or flatline. On the other hand, climate is ALWAYS changing.  If the global temperature goes up we have climate change and if it goes down we also have climate change.  They even have the deck stacked if the temperature flatlines because there will either be an increase or decrease in floods or drought, hurricanes or tornadoes, clouds or clear skies. No matter what happens they win the argument if we submit to their terms.

I, for one, do not submit.

As noted above it is outrageous enough to be called a global warming denier but to be called a climate change denier beyond the pale. If someone just sat around for a thousand years trying to dream up the most annoying affront to common sense they couldn’t come up with a more appropriate phrase.

Why?

Because the climate has always been changing…duh – a thousand times DUH! In the billions of years that the earth has had an atmosphere there has not been one day pass that the climate has not changed.  A person would either have to be brain dead or the dumbest person on the planet to be a climate change denier.  I defy this orthodox global warming bunch to find me one climate change denier out of all the six billion people on the planet.  Find me one person who says the climate stays exactly the same day after day month after month, year after year century after century.  You cannot.

The climate change denier does not exist.  It is a completely mean spirited fabricated phrase for attack purposes only.  It has nothing to do with truth or science.

As I said earlier, a real scientist is careful to insure his words are accurate and reflect reality.  The phrase “climate change denier” reflects neither reality nor is it accurate.

It is instead merely a very childish way to feebly attempt to win the debate…

An attempt that fails miserably.

 

Copyright 2012 by J J Dewey

Register at The Majority Speaks Here

(You do not have to log in to add comments)

Log on to The Majority Speaks  Here

 

Series Navigation<< The Illusion in Attacks, Part 2The Illusion in Attacks, Part 4 >>

Comments

  1. Wow! Talk about a posntig knocking my socks off!

Speak Your Mind

*

Blue Captcha Image
Refresh

*