... Predictions. (About Climate Change)
As presented in The Times by the eminent Scientist (maybe?), Zoologist (yes), Climatologist (probably not?) and sometime explorer, Tim Flannery.
Nothing to cause too much dissention in them, was my first thought, but the response comments contain some of the most vitriolic, vehement arguments against AGW that I've ever seen.
"His next job will be as a carnival psychic, clairvoyant, or palm reader. He is well rehearsed in making vague predictions that fit any eventuality."
"Anyone who considers Tim Flannery to be a font of scientific knowledge displays their own ignorance. "
"It is my understanding that Tim Flannery has no scientific credentials. His claims have little or no substance. "
"ten of the most wishy washy unproven and heavily contradicted predictions of all time, I'd say."
"The notion that Man is causing global warming is as ludicrous as a flea floating on his back down a river, with an erection, yelling 'Raise the drawbridge!' "
I suppose everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but I can't help suspecting that these responses are probably very similar to what the first 'scientists' who claimed the earth was round, as opposed to flat, received. (Generally just before they were put to death as heretics!)
Just a little poser for you - is this the same Tim Flannery who was voted Australian of the year and subsequently much abused by some in government over there?
1 comment:
Sadly, the virulence of such rebuttals, the speed with which they arrive, and the almost total lack of allowance for any other view does make me suspect we have altogether too many organised groups with agendas (and funding) out there who can litter such things with extremes and inhibit healthy debate.
By way of attempted balance, I have to say this applies equally to 'anything green is the word, and must not be queried' activists* as it is by BOFDis*.
*I generalise wildy for effect. Why not? Everone else seems to:)
Post a Comment