Global-warming skeptics cite being 'treated like a pariah

Washington Times ^ | Feb. 11th, 2007 | Eric Pfeiffer

[Rodney Kings Brain]

Scientists skeptical of climate-change theories say they are increasingly coming under attack -- treatment that may make other analysts less likely to present contrarian views about global warming. "In general, if you do not agree with the consensus that we are headed toward disaster, you are treated like a pariah," said William O'Keefe, chief executive officer of the Marshall Institute, which assesses scientific issues that shape public policy. "It's ironic that a field based on challenging unproven theories attacks skeptics in a very unhealthy way." Two climatologists in Democrat-leaning states, David Legates in Delaware and George Taylor in Oregon, have come under fire for expressing skepticism about the origins of climate change. Oregon Gov. Theodore R. Kulongoski is publicly seeking to strip Mr. Taylor, widely known as the state's climatologist, of his position because of his stance.

[yankeedame]

A couple I remember seeing are about Dr. Ehrlich and his Magic Bullet. Edison was laughed at for his electric light, Bell for his phone.

And don't forget Lizter (sp?) the scientist who connected germs with sickness and infection; hence the name, "Listerine".

P.S. "Dr. Ehrlich and his Magic Bullett" was/is a good movie, despite it's hokey name.

[A. Pole]

Being treated like a pariah inthe field of science is nothing new, There are movies that have been made that show this, many scientists with new theories have been pariahs,

This is not something else. We are not dealing with the new theories proposed by the brave independent scientists who challenge the powerful estblished views.

Here we deal with powerful interests establishing the new beliefs in order to replace science and to silence scientific criticism. It might be worse than Soviet Lysenkoism or Nazi Racial Science.

[yankeedame]

The same is true here. The GW crowd is the squeaky wheel for now, but they are about to be silenced by the sheer volume of the science that will overwhelm them.

I wonder... after all communism/socialism has been around as a force since, oh, the mid 1860's to the present; it has been proved a bloody failure (literally) again and again in any way, shape, or form no matter where its been tried, and yet there are no lack of believers, or politicos, eager to try it.

[jwalsh07]

Scientism weds fascism. Can't wait to see what the progeny look like.

[aimhigh]

Here we deal with powerful interests establishing the new beliefs in order to replace science and to silence scientific criticism.

Nothing new. This is normal for scientists that believe in creation. This happened in the late 1800's to geologists who saw the evidence for catastrophic (fast) geologic changes. They were done in by those believing in eons of changes. When Mount Saint Helens blew its top, a local geologist said, "We've just seen 10,000 years of changes in a single day." Hardly.

[EagleUSA]

Political Correctness (along with free market commercialization/privatization) will destroy science.
-----
This is just a liberal thug ploy. We know that "global warming" is a liberal sham -- the thugs of the left are now forcing "into reality" -- they work to rewrite history, now they are trying to rewrite science.

It is not about PC -- it is just pure liberal thuggery.

[tcrlaf]

The Atheist Rapture is upon us!

The GOSPEL of St. Gore cannot be questioned in ANY WAY!
All Deniers will be decertified and denounced!!

You will BURN in Atheist Hell, non-believer!!
(A Week with a naked Rosie O'Donnell)

[sgtbono2002]

***To make it less, we would have to go back to being cave people.**

That is also my contention.

It has taken the Industrial Revolution 200 years to pur us where we are now and it would certainly take much longer to go back. If ever. That is to do away with our 5%. While all the while nature is in charge of the other 95%.

[DustyMoment]

and yet there are no lack of believers, or politicos, eager to try it.

True, but there is a distinct difference between political philosophy and scientific theory. There was a time when "the church" and scholars of the day alleged that those who claimed that the earth revolved around the sun were heretics and some were executed for their beliefs. The science eventually exonerated the "heretics".

At the time that Columbus sailed the ocean blue, people believed that the earth was flat and most believed that Columbus would sail off the end of the earth. Again, science (and the physical properties of the earth) proved these people wrong.

Science wins every time. However, politics and politicians are about power and control. Political philosophies allow politicians to practice experimenting on whole populations as they attempt to prove or disprove one political philosophy over another. You are right that socialism/communism have been tried and failed every time and, yet, there is always someone who didn't get the message that thinks they have a way to make socialism/communism work.

The big message that EVERYONE seems to be missing is this: Those who don't know their history are condemned to repeat it.

[rbg81]

You should read "Fallen Angels" by Pournelle and Niven for a scary counterveiling scenario.

http://www.amazon.com/Fallen-Angels-Larry-Niven/dp/0743471814/ref=cm_cr-mr-title/103-8294168-2456610

[Twinkie]

Nope. I want to get a private jet and zip around like Albert does - also a SUV, a snowmobile and an energy inefficient home. Heh. Me saying something is bad is not very impressive. I'm not a scientist - or anything but one of those non-feminist women Gore's bunch think is a nobody. The surest way for it to sink is for me to comment on the validity of it. Like Homer Simpson working at the nuclear power plant.

[hinckley buzzard]

Scientism weds fascism. Can't wait to see what the progeny look like.

Don't have to wait. Take a look at nazi Germany. All based on the 'science' of the day including the respectable fields(at the time) of eugenics and social darwinism.