The Hill trots out a missive by Arturo Casadevall, MD, Ph.D. (chairman of the Molecular Microbiology & Immunology department at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health) and Ferric C. Fang, MD (professor of Laboratory Medicine and Microbiology at the University of Washington) with the pithy headline
showing that Warmists have completely given up on attempting to persuade, and simply going for insults.
Today there are many active fronts in the war on science. Climatologists are attacked for their virtually unanimous consensus that earth is facing a period of anthropogenic climate change. A vocal movement claims that vaccines are responsible for autism despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. The theory of evolution remains under attack by creationists. Genetically modified organisms (GMOs), including pest-resistant crops that promise greater bounties, are banned in many countries despite overwhelming evidence that they are safe for people and the environment. In keeping with this mood, the Trump administration has repeatedly belittled the value of scientific expertise and eliminated scientists from panels that advise the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Justice.
Well, that is very interesting. Who tends to be against these vaccines? Mostly leftists, especially Hollyweirdos. How about GMOs? These are overwhelmingly people who vote to the Left.
Those who deny specific scientific findings and theories are neither idiots or Luddites. Such individuals have no problem using the fruits of science and technology such as cell phones, medicines and computers. Science deniers are selective in their rejection of science when it focuses on a specific finding that they do not like.
Yes, those same things that create “carbon pollution.” When will Warmists give these up? BTW, a lot of these same Warmists also despise Big Business, which brings them all these products and medicines.
Despite the widespread evidence of science denialism, there is no organized opposition to broad swaths of scientific theory. For instance, no one is denying major theories such as the standard model of particle physics, the germ theory of disease, general relativity, lunar origins, continental drift or Mendelian genetics. Those who make war on science are opposed to some particular scientific finding rather than the scientific method or the entirety of science.
That’s because those are real, as proven by the use of said Scientific Method. Warmism isn’t. Hence, how the authors put it in political, consensus, and smear terms.
But, they are right: science will win out in the end. The Cult of Climastrology will be proven to be wrong. Because it isn’t about science, as Casadevall and Fang inadvertently state
On the other hand, the denial of climate science is centered on resistance to economic and lifestyle changes that would bring about major disruption to certain ways of life, as we switch away from carbon-based fuels. Similarly, resistance to forensic science reform is based on a reluctance to change prosecutorial practice.
I wonder if either of these doctors have given up their own use of fossil fuels and made their own lives carbon neutral, disrupting their own economic lifestyles? Do they require their patients and/or employees to only take sustainable means to their offices? How about requiring their buildings to only use non-fossil fuels energy? What’s that? There wouldn’t be power to do what they do? Huh.
