Barrapunto

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=222 [realclimate.org]


The fact that "climate sceptics" like Lindzen often resort to the accusation that climatologists are "alarmist" to get more funding shows that they've run out of factual arguments. But this conspiracy theory also shows very poor logic: climatologists are telling their governments that we know enough to act, not that we are still uncertain and need more research money. If I were cynical, I would welcome the "climate sceptics" - if everything were still as uncertain as they claim, this would be a great reason for me to ask for more funding for basic climate research. Unfortunately, I tend to care a lot more about the future of our children than about my research funding.

Comment by Stefan -- 15 Feb 2006 @ 8:46 am


Comentario en RealClimate a la critica de la sesion de preguntas y respuestas ante la C'amara de los Lores de Richard Lindzen (para algunos el ultimo cientifico respetable que apoya el "escepticismo" y de momento el unico que no esta relacionado con el creacionismo).

Y este me parece importante tambien (misma fuente):

It appears to me that Linzden is acting less like a scientist, and more like an advocate promoting a preconceived agenda. Rather than following the evidence where it leads, he is starting with a conclusion, and misrepresenting the facts to fit his preconceived opinions.

The fact that he has many important papers to his credit amplifies the power of his rhetoric, and gives a veneer of credibility to those who insist that the human cause of global warming is far from settled science.

And yet Linzden's message is founded on an attack against science itself. The danger from Lindzen's rhetoric lies in the implicit attack on the scientific method. If scientists can't be believed because they are alarming the public into funding ever more research, than the scientific method is no better than think tank ideology at uncovering the mysteries of the natural world. The greatest damage done to the public mind is that so many people have come to believe this. As a result, many ordinary people have come to think that qualified scientists are nothing but doom and gloom scare mongers, and think tank ideologues are brave defenders of the truth.

This irresponsible idea can only harm to the public good.

Comment by Michael Seward -- 15 Feb 2006 @ 9:24 am