So stepping down from my global warming soap box was no hardship whatsoever. I'd looked into it, with more vigour and attention than I originally planned, I'd drawn my own conclusions (critical thinking - get a load of me) and moved on. I used to get annoyed or to a lesser degree - bothered, by people subscribing to every alarmist news story they heard / read. Now, I just do my very best to ignore it.
However one thing I do like to do when I have some free time (ha!), is to peruse the news pages of The Independent's web site. Every single time they do a story about global warming there's a number of people on there arguing about it. A couple of usual suspects, namely someone called Scooby2 and someone else called Icarus-somenumbersorother.
These two are part of a fascinating breed of apparently intelligent people, who point blankly refuse to acknowledge any evidence, point, or opinion to the contrary of their own. For my money, intelligent people don't do this. Blinkered idiots do this. Ignorami if you will. Intelligent people aren't supposed to. They can counter your argument effectively if they so wish, and then you can counter back and maybe you'll both learn something along the way and MAYBE, one of you may change your opinion.
I'm being idealist.
Still, for me it remains a viable course of events. These people however, resort instead to chest-beating and childish name calling. If you dare question what they're saying, they'll belittle you, ridicule you, chastise you and tell you in no uncertain terms that you're a moron. The irony is tangible.
Its fortunate for me that I stepped off the soap box before I happened upon this interesting little world, for I can imagine myself getting quite wrapped up in it. I drop the odd comment in here and there, usually just to wind people up for tis fun, but I don't get into the statistic quoting rants of many.
Global warming has become the new religion, and scooby and icarus are just two of the many high-priests of it. Just as you couldn't say anything nasty about God a couple hundred years ago without being burnt at the stake, so too must you keep your questioning mouth shut about all matters pertaining to the reliability of global warming stats.
Of course if you're reading this you have exceptional taste, and you know as well as I do that the point of science is to question...well, everything. And not just once either. Again and again. Despite what Barack says, the science is never settled. Look at the way atomic theory has changed, look at the way the theory of gravity has changed. Google phlogiston if you want to see how times change and how scientists get it wrong. In fact the 'climate change' phenomenon started in the 70's when scientists claimed the earth was heading towards an ice age, and we need to act now to stop it. Incidentally these same scientists are now advocates of global warming. Do they go where the funding is? You decide.
As a species, we are ever learning, and nothing is certain. Its to be embraced, not backed away from.
To take the piss out of someone who disagrees with you is the action of someone terrified that there is a hole in what they're saying, and any further enquiry and it runs the risk of being exposed. So they shoot you down with attacks on your character or your opinions. The comparisons between religious nut jobs and global warming activists are many, and they're eerily similar. Their behaviour fascinates me, as it should being a Psychology student, but sadly unlike many behaviours its not kept to the individual. This behaviour is affecting the budgets and actions of the world's biggest economies (except China), ergo its affecting the lives of everybody, its also breeding a lot of paranoia and bullying.
Making the human race feel guilty for its progress is an odd thing to do. There's people on the Independent site talking about there only needing to be 1 billion people on the planet. That's all well and good, but what do they want to do with the other 5 and a half billion? Genocide? Who decides who lives and who dies? What criteria will they use? Its ridiculous to the point of absurdity, and what used to be funny to me is taking on a darker hume, as radical opinions are leading on to threats of death for 'non-believers'. Talk about a step back in time.
Imagine we were talking about race, and someone threatened death for anyone who agreed with multi-culturalism. They'd be extremely unpopular and considered some manner of right-wing extremist with dangerous opinions. We may only be talking about the weather, but the sentiment remains. Their behaviour would be deemed unacceptable, yet I can quite happily say we should hang 'deniers' and I'd be applauded for it.
I've pointed out in the past how many of these advocates of the new religion are anti-human. An appalling thing to be. How odd then, that their actions set out to save the very humans they purport to hate. It is odd, but many religions are full of contradictions.
