I'm ready to leave I push the facts in front of me Facts lost Ya facts are never what they seem to be There's nothing there! No information left of any kind LLLifting my head L'L'Looking for danger signs
According to his profile, James Hrynyshyn is a science journalist based in the southeast corner of western North Carolina (the "sea of certainty") and he is an independent-minded journalist specializing in science, ecology and, whenever possible, marine issues. He has a degree in marine biology, another in journalism, and experience working on the Atlantic, Pacific and Arctic coasts. The name of his blog, "Island of Doubt" is taken from the Talking Heads song Crosseyed and Painless, but for real inspiration, he says he's drawn on the writings of Richard Dawkins, Stephen J. Gould, and Carl Sagan, among others. From his photo, he seems like a dog lover and an OK guy, and for several of the above reasons, despite his sincere embrace of the Anthropogenic Global Warming dogma, I have developed an instant liking for the guy. Heck, some of my best friends are warmies!
Of course, liking a guy who likes Dawkins, Gould, Sagan and David Byrne is insufficient reason for making him the subject of a Hitchens Watch post, even for me. But luckily there is a Hitch link and it was provided by James himself in the shape of a recent post: Christopher Hitchens is right: The churches have some 'splaining to do, in which he draws attention to a report from The Pew Forum, in which they attempt to break down people's views on AGW classified by religious affiliation. Sure, they missed out the Hare Krishnas and the Parsees, but they may have got some significant data. Among the conclusions that can be drawn from this data are that White evangelical Protestants are a lot less likely to believe there is solid evidence that human activity is responsible for the recent bout of global warming than other groups, and that "unaffiliated" (non-Christians? including agnostics and atheists?) folks are the most likely to believe that there is solid evidence. This, for James, is the reason why Hitch is right: Religion has poisoned people's minds against global warming, just as it poisons everything else.
I understand where he's coming from, and I have it on the sound advice of a New Yorker who has retired to rural South Carolina that for the most part it's pointless arguing with the natives about scientific issues that clash with their traditional worldview, be it the theory of evil-ution, the unlikelihood of "the Rapture", or global warming. Also, I am prepared to concede that many of the "religious" respondents to the Pew survey answered the question out of ignorance of the issue, and I expect James would agree with me in this.
However, much the same thing could also be said for many of the "unaffiliated", and since a majority of these folks think there is solid evidence that the earth is warming because of human activity, which I contend is a false belief, I am forced to conclude that there is a great deal of ignorance on this entire subject, period.
What the survey does show is a statistically significant difference between the views of "unaffiliated" and "Christian" respondents, with the speaking in tongues White evangelicals differing most markedly from the rest of the population and the White mainline Protestants making an excellent proxy for the average American on this issue. But rather than attributing this result to the noxious effects of holy incense or evangelical preachers, the scientific thing to do would be to put this result down to differences in the type of propaganda the various groups have been exposed to.
After all, to paraphrase Carl Sagan, we're living in a propaganda-haunted world, and Americans, as Gore Vidal famously declared, are the most propagandized people of the lot. From my own personal research, which has involved getting my hands and my reputation dirty, I am quite sure that most people who believe that humans are causing global warming do so because they've been propagandized and not because they understand the science. I'm sure that the same is true of most of those who don't believe. It's the pale blue dot we live on.
Understanding the science of climate is a time-consuming occupation, even for those with the education and enthusiasm to pursue it. But the general public is not being asked to understand the science; it is merely being ordered to accept or at least acquiesce in the dogma. Is this why the task of selling AGW has fallen to that old smoothie Al Gore rather than to someone with a gift for elucidating and explaining real science; someone of the calibre of Dawkins, Gould, Sagan, or even David Byrne—a man after my own heart who likes to keep his carbon footprint small? Where have all the great communicators of science gone?
Facts are simple and facts are straight Facts are lazy and facts are late Facts all come with points of view Facts don't do what I want them to Facts just twist the truth around Facts are living turned inside out Facts are getting the best of them Facts are nothing on the face of things
“The enemies of intolerance cannot be tolerant." • "If it is an offense to justice to hold people who may have been victims of mistaken identity or of vendettas by other factions, then it is also an offense to justice to release psychopathic killers who believe that they have divine permission to throw acid in the faces of girls who want to attend school." • "Don't be such a lesbian!
”
