The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

The Science Is Settled?

Posted on | May 16, 2014 | 59 Comments

Definition of intellectual: Someone who presumes to judge, outside the field of their own expertise, who qualifies as an “expert”:

Florida’s Sen. Marco Rubio came under attack this week for refusing to submit to scientific authority. “I do not believe that human activity is causing these dramatic changes to our climate the way these scientists are portraying it,” he said in an interview with Jonathan Karl.
Nonscientist Ruth Marcus, writing for the Washington Post, declared that Rubio’s words “undermine his other assertion,” namely “that he is prepared to be president.” Juliet Lapidos, also lacking in scientific expertise, went so far as to assert, in a New York Times blog post, that Rubio had “disqualified himself” from the presidency. . . .
[T]hey’re entirely typical of the genre of global-warmist opinion journalism, in which ignorant journalists taunt politicians for their ignorance but have no argument beyond an appeal to authority. . . .
Appeals to authority aren’t necessarily fallacious, except in the realm of formal deductive logic, where they entail adopting the unfounded premise that the authority is infallible. . . .

Read the whole thing. Conservatives are often accused of being “anti-intellectual” for the very reason that we are suspicious of the kind of “expertise” which demands that we accept tendentious claims without criticism, skepticism or dissent. But our skepticism toward climate-change doomsayers is not a reflection of conservative ignorance — quite the opposite. There is a well-established pattern, dating back to the 19th century (if not earlier) of erroneous “consensus” among self-appointed scientific “experts,” and it is our knowledge of this pattern — repeat, knowledge, not ignorance — that leads us  to be skeptical of global-warming Chicken Little prophecies.

The sky is (probably) not falling. Earth’s atmosphere is (probably) large enough to absorb anthropogenic CO2 emissions without catastrophic damage. The result of global warming will (probably) not resemble any of the doomsayers’ predictions, and it is entirely possible that the global warming trend is not actually anthropogenic, but is instead mostly the result of normal variation in Earth’s temperatures. Inaccuracy in measurement, misguided computer modeling, flawed theories and other methodological errors (probably) explain most or all of the “science” that claims we are hurtling toward an impending man-made climate disaster.

Conservatives skeptical of climate-change doomsaying should not let themselves be bullied by arrogant “experts,” nor by the naive “intellectual” apostles of this Chicken Little cult.



59 Responses to “The Science Is Settled?”

  1. Cactus Ed
    May 18th, 2014 @ 7:01 pm

    Considering your last comments, you are quite the insipid racist, am I right?

  2. MichaelAdams
    May 18th, 2014 @ 7:07 pm

    Thomas Jefferson believed in the intellectual inferiority of Black people, and in the efficacy of bleeding for disease. Both are, generally, rejected today. My point, however, was that ‘scientific consensi” are not science. I do not believe that the evidence supports theories of racial inferiority, nor bleeding. Even when there are scientific consensi, I never say that the science is settled. Rather, I say that most investigators today believe thus and such, and, sometimes, in other matters, i.e. medical, my field, I disagree. Over a forty year career, my doubts have often turned out to be correct.

  3. Jon Kahr
    May 19th, 2014 @ 10:25 am

    Here’s a little more insight into the investigation of the nature of the inferior intellect among the primitive hominids:

  4. Jon Kahr
    May 19th, 2014 @ 10:26 am

    It’s very well established, through the social sciences and our daily experience, that blacks have significantly lower IQs than whites and yellows. It’s an inescapable truth, actually.

    Another article about the subject:

    Thomas Jefferson’s take:

  5. MichaelAdams
    May 19th, 2014 @ 11:43 am

    Yes, I figured VDare would be in the mix, somewhere.

  6. bandageking
    May 20th, 2014 @ 6:18 pm

    “@rsmccain: “The sky is (probably) not falling.” The Science Is Settled? @instapundit @jlakely @jamestaranto #tcot”

  7. rsmccain
    May 20th, 2014 @ 7:56 pm

    RT @bandageking: “@rsmccain: “The sky is (probably) not falling.” The Science Is Settled? @instapundit @jlakely @jam…

  8. screwtape1a12
    May 20th, 2014 @ 8:02 pm

    RT @bandageking: “@rsmccain: “The sky is (probably) not falling.” The Science Is Settled? @instapundit @jlakely @jam…

  9. instapundit
    May 20th, 2014 @ 8:04 pm

    RT @bandageking: “@rsmccain: “The sky is (probably) not falling.” The Science Is Settled? @instapundit @jlakely @jam…