Global warming “denialism”
The global warming science is settled, settled! Aren’t you listening? It’s settled!
Why, you have only to look at the IPCC report, which was based on the unimpeachable, peer-reviewed research of every highly-respected climate scientist on the globe!
Well … except for that thing about the Himalayan glaciers melting by 2035. That was just a throw-away claim made in a popular article by a non-researcher, but it sounded really scary so they tossed it in.
And, well … except for that thing about the rain forests, that came from a report by an environmental group that wouldn’t have any bias, oh no. Not to mention that the report, besides not being peer-reviewed and being written by people with no expertise in climate research, didn’t actually say what the IPCC claimed it said. But other than that, it was really reliable.
And, well … except for the fact that some of the most prominent figures among the climate scientists engaged in illegal action to conceal their purported evidence, though they managed to drag out the process long enough that the statute of limitations has run.
And, well, also … except for that other fact that while they were breaking the law by concealing their purported evidence, they also “lost” (oops!) the raw data that didn’t have their “corrections” in it.
And, um … except that the Russians say some of their own climate observations were deliberately removed from the records to produce an apparent global warming.
But other than that the science is absolutely settled and beyond any rational questioning. Which is why, no matter what the topic under discussion, commenters on ScienceBlogs routinely throw in sneers about global warming “denialism”, saying, in no uncertain terms, that anyone who doubts any global warming claim whatsoever, no matter who it comes from or what provenance it might have, is equivalent to a believer in homeopathy and creationism.
Well, I don’t believe in homeopathy, creationism, distance healing, astrology, 9/11 trutherism*, or birtherism**. But I am very troubled by the evidence that is coming out about global warming. At this point, I don’t trust the so-called researchers any more than I trust any other political hack.
And I really wish the people who are pleased to style themselves skeptics on ScienceBlogs could bring themselves to give up the fallacy of guilt by association. Global warming is not necessarily true just because many of the people who doubt it, disagree with them politically.
* 9/11 “truthers” claim the United States government and/or the Mossad — anyone besides Arab terrorists — brought down the Twin Towers.
** “Birthers” claim that The One is not a U.S. citizen and cannot produce a valid birth certificate because he was born in Kenya and thus is not eligible to be President.