Comments on: A modest proposal regarding the climate change debate

By: steph

steph — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 03:46:48 +0000

Yes I understand … but I’m just a cynic!

By: Daniel O. McClellan

Daniel O. McClellan — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 00:22:27 +0000

I think this will be the real test of the scientific academy. If everyone responds like Mr. Pachauri (as if “they’re just blowing off steam” could ever be a legitimate response to something like this) then it fails. If there is honest introspection and ideas are amended accordingly then it works.

By: Chris Brady

Chris Brady — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 19:40:35 +0000

I appreciate those who at least recognize that this is not about “saving the world.” It will last long after we are gone (that is, of course, excepting the Parousia). Preserving the environment is for our protection, not the Earth’s.

By: Don

Don — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 19:03:33 +0000

I thought it was a conflict between those who want to destroy the world and those who only want to destroy its economy

By: Chris Brady

Chris Brady — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 15:52:46 +0000

“The Right Reverend” refers to a bishop in either the Anglican or Roman Catholic traditions (and maybe eastern as well, but I am not sure).

“The Very Reverend” refers to certain senior priests in a diocese, usually the dean of the cathedral or deanery. (I have also been told that as an academic dean I could be called “The Very Reverend” but I don’t see any need )

By: Lee McCardle

Lee McCardle — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 15:43:23 +0000

After reading clergy names in your commentary, I was inspired to ask this question: In the title, The Right Reverend Doctor John Doe, what is the meaning of the word “Right”? Cheers on a snowy day! -Lee

By: Chris Brady

Chris Brady — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 12:14:21 +0000

And what I am suggesting is that there are scientists who disagree with the consensus based upon their scientific opinion, NOT their politics.

In other words, there is genuine disagreement that is NOT controlled by politics, but that is lost in the noise of the media AND because any disagreeing scientists are being labelled as “marginal,” thus dismissing them before even evaluating their views. (This is the importance of the email “climategatee,” it brings peer review into serious doubt.)

By: steph

steph — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 04:40:37 +0000

but that’s what I’m suggesting – disagreement controlled by politics.

By: Chris Brady

Chris Brady — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 04:10:28 +0000

There is certainly a political aspect to it for many but what is lost in the noise is that the choir of scientists is not in harmony, there is disagreement.

By: steph

steph — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 23:04:33 +0000

I thought it was less about scientists disagreeing and more about politics.