http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/22624
In this April 2010 article from the Canada Free Press titled 30,000 Anti-Global Warming Scientists Can’t be Wrong, the argument is made that the level of authority of educational institute is what can deem global warming a non siquitur. The article lures you in with a movie-like trailer hook that basically says “From the magazine that introduced us to the world of X-rays, DNA helix and genome mapping; now brings you the truth on CO2 little to non-existent role in global warming.” Obviously this article is crediting all the major discoveries that Nature has been able to publish under the premise that all of the articles it runs are the next big ‘scientific truth.’ Nature, a peer reviewed journal, is highly renowned in the publications of new insights of scientific work. However, in academia of science, usually a initial paper on a topic is only an door opener to replication and possible debunked even if the data has been approved by editors to be gathered in a scientific manner eligible for publication. All too often in mainstream news the public is introduced to a “new study just out” that indicated one thing or another. Just like the publications that were seeming used in State of Fear to disprove global warming, this article picks and chooses one of the possible 1,000’s of articles on global warming and chooses to further legitimize it by backing up where the 30,000 scientist were educated.
They rely on the prestige of former Nobel Prize winners and MIT, UCLA, Princeton, Harvard who have signed a letter to the Council of American Physical Society that states that the data does not support global is caused by increased CO2 concentrations. The credibility is established by just dropping prestigious schools that these dissenters came from. These schools are well renowned and have probably produced many of the brightest minds of our nation. However, Ted Kaczynski also went to Harvard and even taught at UC Berkeley let alone mention the numerous prestigious institutions, including U of MN, that assisted in research of the eugenics movement. By gaining clout by just naming institutions we see how the general public will seemingly take any ideas that come from pedigree scientists as ‘truth.’ These credentials as well as the news media propagating only parts of a whole dialog is what can lead to false information spreading as public knowledge. The damage of not fully understanding or wanting to just merely discredit one aspect of scientific thought like global warming in which it doesn’t produce new insights to further study seems to me that the 30,000 scientists that can’t be wrong, don’t want to find the right way either they just want to buck a trend and see if they come out on top at the expense of taking for granted the authority that they have used to misinform the general public.
Yeah, that title leaves a giant hole, doesn't it. 30,000 scientists against how many that argue that global warming is real? Double that? And the fact is that by naming someone "scientist," it doesn't mean they're correct. They are certainly more qualified than I am to answer these questions, but that doesn't make what they say any more factual. 30,000 scientists CAN be wrong. We're all human, after all.
ReplyDeleteGuys, guys, AT LEAST check out the 'About us' before taking too much of this seriously. This is a far right site, with little or no connection to Canada (and considerable connection to racist identity politics). What they report is sort of Crichtonized.
ReplyDeleteAnd BTW: Dr. Kaczynski is from my Alma Mater, Michigan, not that low-rent Harvard.....