The Only Response to Denialist Nonsense:
It’s important to remember that the subject of climate science stems from physics and chemistry, not politics. The researchers that have been working in this field are people who are exceptional at math and science. There are currently ~ 5 million job openings in the U.S. for people with STEM degrees. A quantitative analyst working at a Wall Street firm would start in the mid-six figures, while the same person with the same skills would start at a climate research facility in the mid FIVE-figures. These men and women have chosen to research an unfathomably complex phenomenon for a tenth of their earning potential in an economy that literally cannot fill job openings for anyone with a STEM related degree.
Conspiracy theories that denigrate these men and women as somehow “greedy” are intellectually bankrupt and are beneath the dignity and maturity that we are trying to foster here at The Centerhold. Science and learning are the hallmark of the past 300 years of the industrial revolution – where the average person has seen their lifespan triple, and their quality of life increase dozensfold. The idea that we would suddenly reject science and academics in THIS field – which has been developed on a shoestring budget over four generations by people who rejected far greater wealth and security to work on a problem that they felt was benefitting (or potentially rescuing) mankind – because of some strange conspiracy in which no-one benefits… It’s nonsense, and utterly unworthy of anyone who wastes their breath on it.
The researchers are not perfect, and the monstrously complex problems that they are trying to grapple with are not yet fully resolved, but they deserve more respect and more basic humanity from the conspiracy theorists. There is no political component to basic science. The Stefan-Boltzmann Law does not have a partisan slant. It’s just true. The law of conservation of mass and energy is true whether you are a democrat or a republican.
The political center MUST respect science. There is no other side here. I personally am disgusted by those that oppose the Keystone pipeline (though I recognize it to be a relatively small business deal in the energy industry); I’m rabidly pro-fracking, and I have no respect for electric vehicles… I think the DOE has done a terrible job in funding R&D on energy projects, and believe that current DOE research into alternative energy offers a clinic on corruption and incompetence, and the funding should be stripped at large – with those working in the DOE audited and if warranted brought up on criminal charges (though I believe that twice that level of funding should be given to the NSF to distribute for alternative energy research and development). I’ll talk about all of these subjects in future posts on energy, and we can argue them out… There are multiple opinions or stances that one could have while still dealing with the real world and using real facts.
But there is no “position” or “stance” that can be taken on energy physics. It’s the word of God – literally an unbreakable law that we must abide by. There is no “opinion”, and therefore there can be no alternative “opinion”.
The mission statement of The Centerhold is to offer a safe middle ground where people from different sides of an issue can learn or review a topic and debate multiple viewpoints at the center. In that spirit, I have no intention of insulting or belittling any guest. But I also have no intention of wasting my time talking about whether our military could fight off dragons, or what might happen to the world if the turtle that is balancing the world on its back trips… There are points in time where your perspective is polluted by blatant lies and propaganda to the point where your position is nonsense. The best thing that can be done at that point is to point out that your position is nonsense, invite you to review some of the facts of the matter, and politely ask that you avoid participating in the discussion until such time as you can address reality.