Deeper, Darker Climate Change

When you hear global warming people say "All the scientists..." or "The science is settled..." know they are defending a position for which they have  no basis.  Science is not a political matter nor is it settled.  Einstein rattled the windows of halls that had been settled for 300 years and what he said is now under serious challenge.

Dr. Christopher Essex, a professor of Applied Mathematics at the University of Western Ontario, is well versed on the philosophy of science which should guide all who are in the discipline, declares political activists who undermine scientists for not embracing "climate change theology" have crossed a line by making direct political attacks on dissenters.   Discussion and descent are part of the business. "Comes with the territory."

Dr, Essex and a group of scientists published a paper methodically critiqing the Royal Society's position on climate change declaring areas that were “weak, limited, and flimsy.”  The group concluded there has been a cultural shift and their science arguments have deteriorated. 

Scientists have moved from “civilized dialogues in which people have collegial attitudes and work together find the truth.”  Essex characterized  the pro-climate change philosophy as a form of sophistry, catering to popular opinion rather than concern with the truth.

Dr. Essex declares anthropogenic global warming proponents use an old form "Eristic argument:"  Eris was the Greek goddess of chaos. "They are using this very old, high profile tactic in the modern world under a heading of rediscovery by Saul Alinsky."  This is especially telling since both Mr. Obama and Hillary Clinton are serious Alinsky disciples.  Hillery wrote her Baccalaureate thesis at Wellesly on Alinsky's "Rules For Radicals."  So controversial and alarming is her paper it has been sealed, if not destroyed, never to be seen.  Hillery leaves no tracks.

Essex declares the Royal Society “has now taken kind of an authoritarian approach, rather than a authoritative approach and are now taking an official position on climate change,” and that they are not considering the science.  Welcome to the club, sir.

Our only argument with Dr. Essex is that he fails to discuss the effect of the government control of science since World War II.  The war created massive bureaus to develop weapons.  We have observed bureaus are very good at achieving immortality. 

The critical flaw is that government science bureaus are quick to develop an interest in flashy, easy-to-sell stuff like space over ocean studies in spite of our future clearly lying in the seas.  Officials who award study grant money go for the popular, politically correct and positive for the party in power rather than pursue studies of merit.  

We have easily wasted several trillion Dollars International Space Stataion, Mars projects, SETI, Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence, Man on the Moon, Moon Base and other such nonsense suitable for comic books, Spongebob Squarepants and Peewee's Playhouse.  We have passed into a much deeper, darker climate change.

Adrian Vance