Pitch-Perfect Satire
Posted by
tgirsch
Is it just me, or is the guy in the middle a perfect summation of the global warming “skeptics” movement?
Is it just me, or is the guy in the middle a perfect summation of the global warming “skeptics” movement?
Royalty was like dandelions. No matter how many heads you chopped off, the roots were still there underground, waiting to spring up again.
It seemed to be a chronic disease. It was as if even the most intelligent person had this little blank spot in their heads where someone had written: "Kings. What a good idea." Whoever had created humanity had left in a major design flaw. It was its tendency to bend at the knees.
-- Terry Pratchett, Feet of Clay
He is, but not in the way you probably intended.
When the Thiomersal controversy broke out in the 90’s, anyone who didn’t agree with the people pushing the Thiomersal-autism link were charictured like the guy in the middle. Since the ban of Thiomersal in 2002 and the absence of a subsequent drop in autism rate along with additional research in 2004 and 2006 that disproved the existence of any link, the skeptics were shown to be correct. Of course, none of the groups that demonized them have since apologized or retracted thier claims.
This is a patterns that’s repeatedly occur the last 20 years or so. Sacchrin, silicone breast implants, etc. In each case the skeptics who demanded more evidence before making knee jerk policy decisions where charictured like the guy in the middle. And in each case the skeptics were ultimately proved right.
Now maybe there is a global warming issue. But as long as its proponents only response seems to be appeals to orthodoxy and demonization of its opponents instead of actual science, I will remain a skeptic.
Comment 2/25/2007
Stormy:
But as long as its proponents only response seems to be appeals to orthodoxy and demonization of its opponents instead of actual science, I will remain a skeptic.
Huh? So the vast majority of peer-reviewed articles on climate change that support the AGW theory are nothing more than “appeals to orthodoxy?”
Comment 2/25/2007