Religious Intolerance

Some eco-freaks take their views way too seriously. In the spirit of animal rights campaigners who have damaged animal testing labs and threatened staff, scientists who express scepticism over global warming are receiving death threats.

It’s bad enough that they find themselves shunned by the left-wing scientific establishment. Science is a very closed shop these days. Either you toe the party line or you find something else to do.

The battle for the philosophy of science was lost a long time ago.  And that’s what it is. It’s not about science. It’s about philosophy. It’s about religion.

Somehow I missed it last week when Professor Timothy Ball appeared in The Great Global Warming Swindle, a documentary on Channel 4. He was among several scientists who claimed this idea of anthropogenic global warming has become a religion. It has become a very intolerant religion, much more so than the caricature of Christianity portrayed by media-savvy scientists. The global warming religion is forcing any alternative explanations to be ignored.

Ball, a former climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg, has received five deaths threats by email since raising concerns about claims surrounding the degree of anthropogenic climate change. Death threats. I suppose that as a climatology professor, what he says has some clout. Combine that with the fact that he’s from Canada, where much of the evidence is easily accessible, and he could be real trouble.

Now I’m betting whoever is threatening him wouldn’t think of clubbing a baby seal.

Advertisements

One Response to Religious Intolerance

  1. Verdurous says:

    The problem is not that global warming skeptics continue to put forward unorthodox views. Science needs opposition and questioning to function. The problem is that there is a gross over-representation of these views in the popular media as compared to scientific literature. In Australia our only national broadsheet “The Australian” continues to put forward a strong skeptic line. This is bizarre and inappropriate given the weight of evidence. If for example this paper gave heavy coverage to skeptics of the link between smoking and ill health, there would be questions asked and possibly some form of investigation by industry bodies/regulators.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: