Replies

It is important *now* to separate those individuals who "preach" global warming as "faith", from those who accept a preponderance of the evidence. Why? Because if and when it is obvious that global warming is hooey, the "faith-based' global warming advocates must be purged from any position where they can influence science again. There just isn't any room in science for the arrogance of faith. This is because science is like a game of chess. If you play a game of chess, you play by the rules, or it isn't chess. You can play with chess pieces on what looks like a chess board, but unless you follow the rules, exactly, it isn't chess. In science, you can have scientific equipment and work in a laboratory, but unless you follow each and every rule of science, it isn't science. Importantly, what you accomplish is the same, too. If you play a game of chess by the rules, that is *all* you have done: play a game of chess. And if you conduct a scientific experiment to its conclusion, that, too, is all you have done. People mistakenly assume that because you draw conclusions because of a scientific experiment, by interpolation or extrapolation, that they, too, are "scientific". This is NOT true. They are not. While they *may* follow the course of the experiment, and very closely, unless they, too, explicitly follow the rules of science, then they are NOT part of science. This is the great error that non-scientists invariably make. Some accidentally, many on purpose, because they wish to use the legitimacy of science to back up their non-scientific claims. And in the case of global warning, they have pretended that science gives them the *right* to brow-beat and shout down scientists who reserve judgment until observations justify the hypothesis. So they are as mistaken and anti-science as was the Catholic church in its suppression of Galileo. And this is why they must be purged from positions where they can influence and corrupt science further. And why we should remember their names.

It is because of beautifully written posts like yours that I am addicted to FreeRepublic.

So they are as mistaken and anti-science as was the Catholic church in its suppression of Galileo.

Not to nit-pick but Galileo's work was largely funded by the Church, as was nearly all science at the time. The Church has never been anti-science. Galileo ran into trouble when he insisted that scripture should be altered to match his observations.