Quote:
Originally Posted by Burninator
You mean his all encompassing definition of religion by including global warming/climate change under that umbrella? Whether you agree or not about that issue, calling one side a religion is stretching the word religion so far as to make the word useless. I fond it neither intelligent nor well thought out.
|
A very poor reading at what he was getting at. Very poor.
From Aliens Cause Global Warming[SIZE=small]The Scientific American attacked Lomborg for eleven pages, yet only came up with nine factual errors despite their assertion that the book was "rife with careless mistakes."[/SIZE]
[SIZE=small] It was a poor display, featuring vicious ad hominem attacks, including comparing him to a Holocaust denier. The issue was captioned: "Science defends itself against the Skeptical Environmentalist."[/SIZE]
[SIZE=small]Really. Science has to defend itself? Is this what we have come to? When Lomborg asked for space to rebut his critics, he was given only a page and a half. When he said it wasn't enough, he put the critics' essays on his web page and answered them in detail. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=small]Scientific American threatened copyright infringement and made him take the pages down. Further attacks since, have made it clear what is going on. Lomborg is charged with heresy. That's why none of his critics needs to substantiate their attacks in any detail. That's why the facts don't matter. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=small]That's why they can attack him in the most vicious personal terms. He's a heretic. Of course, any scientist can be charged as Galileo was charged. I just never thought I'd see the Scientific American in the role of Mother Church. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=small]Is this what science has become? I hope not. But it is what it will become, unless there is a concerted effort by leading scientists to aggressively separate science from policy.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=small] The late Philip Handler, former president of the National Academy of Sciences, said that "Scientists best serve public policy by living within the ethics of science, not those of politics. If the scientific community will not unfrock the charlatans, the public will not discern the difference-- science and the nation will suffer." [/SIZE]