What I’ve noticed, especially from those on the right, is that no matter how many millions of scientists say one thing, those on the right will believe anything on the fringe, just to oppose the left. Most people on the right AND the left are not scientists, and have no real way of verifying whether or not any of the scientific information they’re given is accurate or not. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t a difference between the sides on this issue.

I’m a centered libertarian. When it comes to global warming, I have no comment and no opinion. Though, if I was forced to make a choice, I would side with the majority. What choice do I really have? I’m not a scientist and I don’t intend to become one just so I can pick a side.

I think what I’m seeing here is that those on the left are doing what seems rational — they’re believing what they’re told by the scientific authority. Those on the right are ignoring and disbelieving what they’re told, probably because of some conspiracy theory about economic takeover, and instead believing fringe scientists who are obviously not in the majority.

It is clear in the scientific arena that those who believe in global warming are 99 to 1. But to be totally fair and unbias, I must point out that every single scientist in the world could be wrong and if just one is right, that’s all it takes. I’m saying ad populum does not validate the veracity of the scientific claims. It’s just odd that those who don’t know jack-shit about science (just like everyone else), are intentionally siding with the minority. What could be the reason behind that, if not for the conspiracy theory?

To me, this type of reasoning gives away the deceptive attitude of those on the right. Not that the left is without fault. Oh, I could go on for days about that. But here and now, I am simply pointing out the ugly truth about the right on this specific issue.

This is a response to this post.

From the page:

“The Climategate scandal is back, as more emails between leading climate scientists are posted online. The latest leak from the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia has re-ignited the wrangle around manmade climate change.

Much like the scandal of 2009, Tuesday’s leak comes just days before UN climate talks, set to kick off in Durban, South Africa on 28 November.

Critics who have long accused climate scientists of cherry-picking their data to prove that manmade climate change exists, might feel vindicated by some messages.  One email from a climate researcher identified as Overpeck reads: “The trick may be to decide on the main message and use that to guid[e] what’s included and what is left out.”

Another scientist expressed his fears regarding potential data manipulation:  “Observations do not show rising temperatures throughout the tropical troposphere unless you accept one single study and approach and discount a wealth of others.”  The scientist went on to stress a “need to communicate the uncertainty and be honest.” 

It appears that various government bodies have put pressure on climate scientists to justify their own policy initiatives, ranging from restrictive environmental taxes and regulations, switching from fossil fuels to alternative sources of energy, to re-appropriating farm land for profitable biofuel schemes. 

Speaking of the governmental influence on climate change policy, one scientist said:

 “I can’t overstate the HUGE amount of political interest in the project as a message that the Government can give on climate change to help them tell their story. They want the story to be a very strong one and don’t want to be made to look foolish.”

Based on the government-led drive, one email demonstrated the need to spin the climate change debate for public consumption:

“Having established scale and urgency, the political challenge is then to turn this from an argument about the cost of cutting emissions – bad politics – to one about the value of a stable climate – much better politics. […] the most valuable thing to do is to tell the story about abrupt change as vividly as possible.”

Amid mounting pressure to come up with the right results, one scientist said “they’ll probably kill us” if the researchers’ findings indicated that climate change had resulted from natural fluctuations and not manmade actions.”

Lol… this should piss you fuckin’ hippies off a bit