Recently I was reading an article about someone who questioned some of the science behind global warming and after discussing the article with a few other people I had to admit the man had some points about some questions that aren’t being discussed. What is normal climate and do they consider normal change in their models? How is cloud cover accounted for since it is larger affect than CO2?
Climate change is not having a debate anymore. After years of misinformation everyone is so confused by what is a real question and what is bullshit we had lost the ability to ask and discuss questions on the science behind climate change. That matter is consider closed to many. But after all 2008 managed to prove economic forecasts are garbage so what makes the climate models any better? Despite the need to discuss these questions anyone who goes against the popular opinion are often turned into villains before they can speak more than a question.
This is not to say I’m a denier or anything. I’m merely pointing out the ability to have a logical debate on the issues is far gone that it is impossible to have today. Climate change is now less about the science and more about a belief. I’m more likely to say I believe in climate change and global warming rather than discuss the matter with facts. We’ve managed to turn one of the great discussions of our time into a matter of faith and I mourn that loss. Faith doesn’t leave a lot of room for discussion in the wrong crowd.
The implications of being wrong are huge. Should we be focusing on renewable energy and effiency to extend our exisiting fossil fuels usefulness? Should we be focusing more on sustainable design than clean coal technology? These questions and others should be asked but can’t be discuss now.
So what are your thoughts on the debate? Are the deniers being ignored for good reason or do they actually have a few interesting points?