If you recall the Global Warming hysteria claims of rising sea levels, this tends to debunk the so-called "settled science", which is one of those phrases like "military intelligence" which don't make much sense on the surface.
Science doesn't usually get settled in one lifetime. Anyone remember the 1970's Global Cooling scare? How long was it from Galileo's championing of heliocentrism before it became "settled science"? It wasn't during Galileo's lifetime, because he spent the rest of his life under house arrest for his theories.
There is a valid reason for not calling science "settled" within your own lifetime: We live in a period with it's own politics. To call a scientific theory "settled" is only to say that it matches political goals of this period of time. This is a dangerous confluence, causing science to tell politicians what they want to hear.
You may ask, "Why would politicians want Global Warming?" I will refer you to the phrase from Rahm Emanuel:
You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. … This crisis provides the opportunity for us to do things that you could not before.
Although Emanuel talks about the more idealistic side of big problems, politicians view big problems through the lens of their own rational self-interest. And what does a person in a position of power want? More power, of course! So big problems inevitably become big power grabs. "I will need to take these rights from you, in order to save you from this big problem." Needless to say, you never get your rights back, even after the problem has passed. However, for politicians, problems NEVER pass.
A problem like Global Warming is ideal for politicians, because it is so long-term that it never has to go away. "The temperature may not have gone up this year, but it will in 10-20-100 years from now, if we don't take action!" At what point do we realize President/Senator/Congressman Chicken Little doesn't really care if the sky is falling? He is using this for his own gain.
No comments:
Post a Comment