Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Freeman Dyson calls for tolerance toward global warming skeptics
Freeman Dyson's scientific credentials are unimpeachable. He has sounded a skeptical note about global warming alarmism before on the grounds that the information we have is not sufficient to make confident predictions about such things. Here he is standing up for the right of global warming skeptics to be heard.
2 comments:
You are welcome to post at this blog. You are asked, however, to refrain from the following:
1. Name-calling;
2. Questioning the motives or integrity of people you have never met just because you disagree with them;
3. Using obscenities or other expressions not appropriate or necessary to civilized discussion;
4. Taking disagreement personally;
5. Demeaning or insulting remarks.
The host will attempt to abide by the same rules and only asks that you not provide him with the temptation to do so in return by violating them.
Failure to comply with these rules can result (depending solely on the arbitrary and inscrutable will of the host) in the deletion of offending posts and suspension of posting privileges. Such measures are more likely if you post anonymously.
I don't read your site enough Martin, but I aspire to it's intellectual climate. You're the only other blogger in KY that I know who'd quote Freeman Dyson besides me, and you do it in a more learned manner than me.
ReplyDeleteGreat work.
BTW, I love his theory about energy and civilizations. I doubt he's much read among the ultra-environmentalists these days who jsut want to reduce supply.
Mr Dyson is scientist who deserves to be heard. It is hard to disagree with the first part of the article, added below.
ReplyDeleteThe problem is that most of the people arguing about global warming, pro and con, are neither scientists nor familiar with the appropriate research. The simple fact that Republicans tend to be anti-"global warming belief" and Democrats pro "global warming belief" clearly shows that people are making up their minds on non-scientific grounds.
The full article (two book reviews) is at http://www.nybooks.com/articles/21494
"Environmentalism has replaced socialism as the leading secular religion. And the ethics of environmentalism are fundamentally sound. Scientists and economists can agree with Buddhist monks and Christian activists that ruthless destruction of natural habitats is evil and careful preservation of birds and butterflies is good. The worldwide community of environmentalists -- most of whom are not scientists -- holds the moral high ground, and is guiding human societies toward a hopeful future. . . ."
jah