I think what I'm most generally alarmed by in the GW argument is this pervading lack of skepticism.
Civilization has opened up shop and been humming along for the last 9,000 years if not more, now quite suddenly all life on earth is in apocolyptic jeopardy all on account of human activity over the last 100 years, if that.
Who are the warmists' intellectual ancestors? If I were to pick another group they remind me most of, it would be the Amish
. The class of science it reminds me most of is phrenology
- respectable in its day but ludicrous in retrospect. So if you could mix 18th century phrenology, 20th century (modern contemporary) Amish, WWE Smackdown style intensity, and Southern Baptists' rank zealotry, you would have your modern day warmist-environmentalist.
Can we blame the phrenologists? They did think
it was science. And hey, who doesn't like the Amish? Can we all not relate?
What I see it as is, a little bit of progressive fear - about progress
. A bit of modernist paranoia - about the modern age. It's advancement that they're trying to stop - why?
Beyond all that - where is the healthy dose of skepticism that any casual observer might reasonably
expect to find in witness of such a group as the warmists? Where is even the meagerest, most anemic, shriveled, fossilized shred of skepticism, in a group who would have you believe that it is they
, who are on the side of "science"?
I think we can all agree that that's a reasonable, pertinent and valid question, one very much incumbent on any participant in the warmist movement today.