2008 Woodie Awards
Global warming and mass hysteria
Jorge Pineda
Issue date: 10/10/07 Section: Opinion
In 1965, a conference on climate change in Boulder, Colorado ushered in an epoch of awareness regarding the trend of shifting world temperature. Many scientists became convinced that the increased levels of carbon dioxide would soon have catastrophic effects on the world's ecosystems, weather patterns and would dramatically alter the lives of all people on Earth.
By the '70s media outlets embraced these sensationalistic predictions. In 1975, a Newsweek article cautioned about "ominous signs that the Earth's weather patterns have begun to change". They further predicted consequences such as "drought and desolation", "devastating outbreak of tornadoes" as well as mass starvation and migration. These ominous warnings should sound very familiar to anyone who has watched Al Gore's infamous An Inconvenient Truth. However, '70s climatologists were not talking about global warming. Ironically, their major concern was the coming of a new ice age. In the '70s it was "global cooling" that was all the rage. In 1974 the National Science Board of America stated that "during the last 20 to 30 years, world temperatures have fallen, irregularly at first but more sharply over the last decade". Many were convinced that a glacial epoch was imminent.
Today, there is much talk about a scientific "consensus" over the looming catastrophes that will overcome the world if we do not invest in Gore's "Generation Investment Management" in order to offset our "carbon footprint". However, as soon as one hears about a scientific "consensus" it should be a clear sign that you are being had. A claim to consensus is a tactic for those who wish to avoid debate. Science is not a democracy; consensus is the business of politics. Isaac Newton needed no consensus, in fact, he went against it.
This is not to say that global warming is not a reality; many indications suggest that we are entering a warmer period. The fact that we must respect our environment is also a common-sense principle, and is hardly a novel concept.
By the '70s media outlets embraced these sensationalistic predictions. In 1975, a Newsweek article cautioned about "ominous signs that the Earth's weather patterns have begun to change". They further predicted consequences such as "drought and desolation", "devastating outbreak of tornadoes" as well as mass starvation and migration. These ominous warnings should sound very familiar to anyone who has watched Al Gore's infamous An Inconvenient Truth. However, '70s climatologists were not talking about global warming. Ironically, their major concern was the coming of a new ice age. In the '70s it was "global cooling" that was all the rage. In 1974 the National Science Board of America stated that "during the last 20 to 30 years, world temperatures have fallen, irregularly at first but more sharply over the last decade". Many were convinced that a glacial epoch was imminent.
Today, there is much talk about a scientific "consensus" over the looming catastrophes that will overcome the world if we do not invest in Gore's "Generation Investment Management" in order to offset our "carbon footprint". However, as soon as one hears about a scientific "consensus" it should be a clear sign that you are being had. A claim to consensus is a tactic for those who wish to avoid debate. Science is not a democracy; consensus is the business of politics. Isaac Newton needed no consensus, in fact, he went against it.
This is not to say that global warming is not a reality; many indications suggest that we are entering a warmer period. The fact that we must respect our environment is also a common-sense principle, and is hardly a novel concept.
Viewing Comments 1 - 2 of 2
JM
posted 10/11/07 @ 11:28 PM EST
Jorge, you have manipulated the facts yet again. Science has proven that human activity creates an large amount of greenhouse gases, which trap heat energy close to the Earth's surface and affect global weather patterns. (Continued…)
Jeff Milligan
posted 12/14/07 @ 11:50 AM EST
In the late 1800's a man named Thomas Malthus started a mass hysteria similar to the current global warming hysteria by predicting that populations were increasing geometricall while resources to sustain life were only increasing arithmetically. (Continued…)
Post a Comment