John Stossel helps expose the real Inconvenient Truth
Note that Algore didn't offer to come on television to defend the rubbish he peddles.
Stossel points out that in Britain, they've put a disclaimer on the film explaining that there is still a real scientific debate and the movie should not be taken as fact.
Labels: Political correctness
posted by Deacon David Oatney @ 1:18 AM
1 Comments:
Of course, the thing we absolutely must avoid is the continued politicization of this issue. The left has turned the phenomenon of global warming into a political football, and some on the right have done this as well. This has, in my opinion, hurt the development of the science behind this issue. It's becoming increasingly difficult to get to the real truth of the issue, and that is to the detriment of every person on the face of the Earth.
At this point, there is really little doubt that the Earth is warming. The questions that do not have consensus are:
1) The cause of the warming. The possibilities are natural (Earth-caused), anthropogenic (human-caused), or extraterrestrial (from space, likely the Sun). Likely, there is a little of all three at play. The key is to determine the inter-play between these factors.
2) The extent of the warming and how it may/may not continue. Most scientists seem to think that the Earth has warmed anywhere from 0.5 to 1.0 degrees in the last century, but climate models vary widely as to what will happen in the next century.
3) The effects of the warming that will occur in the near future. We already know the affects of recent warming -- glaciers are melting, climate patterns are shifting somewhat, polar ice is disappearing at an increased rate, etc. However, because we don't know how the warming will continue, we cannot accurately predict the effects of whatever warming may occur. We can guess...and those truly interested in the science have decent guesses. But the doomsday-ists are more vocal here.
Until we have more of a consensus, especially on issues 2 and 3 that I noted above, we cannot effectively plan a course of action to mitigate future effects of warming. Clearly, it would be foolhardy to 1) do absolutely nothing, or 2) take extreme steps that may not be necessary but that would wreck the world economy.
Again, the politicization of global warming is a big problem. I sincerely hope that when anyone speaks about the issue, whether it be Al Gore or anyone else, they do so because of the science and not to score political points.
If people want to play political football, I would suggest using a different issue.
Matt
Post a Comment
<< Home