Originally Posted by
Lookleft
Willie have another look at that letter, the eminent signatories are not claiming that climate change is not occurring they are more concerned with NASA's stance on the catastrophic effect of climate change. My take on it is that they consider the science of the extreme cc hypothesis is not settled and that their primary concern is for the reputation of NASA. Some of those signatories established NASA's reputation so to just dismiss them as equivalent to kitchen hands suggests that a hysterical narrative is at play. Yet if you are a paleontologist who is able to secure a government paid position and spruik the hysterical cc narrative then you are considered to be an expert on cc! If you are a failed US presidential candidate looking for relevance post politics then you are considered an expert on cc and if you are an actor who has no scientific background then you are considered an expert on cc. Its not surprising that a significant number of people view with sceptisicm the claims of those who say that cc is out of control and it is only by changing the Western way of life that it will be fixed.
I’ve specifically not dismissed the NASA petition, I’ve acknowledged that there’s some smart people in group of 49. I guess what I’m trying to point to is what might otherwise be referred to as “false balance” I.e. a group of 49 former employees versus not only the current group of 18,000 employees but every other employee, scientist or not that has ever worked for NASA. It’s an interesting letter and I read it with some degree of surprise for sure.
At at some point the media stopped publishing articles of the medical research that failed to find a link between smoking cigarettes and it’s not that the information wasn’t any longer available or being produced it just stop being disputed by everyone who had a dog in the game in favour of the tobacco industry.
At some point you too will have to settle on a view one way or the other, maybe you feel that point is not yet, fair enough. To some degree I’m open to alternative points of view, that’s why I read the letter too, I just don’t find it ultimately persuasive despite the respect I would no doubt hold for the skills and expertise of those that wrote it.