Yanche wrote:The global warming debate has shown how poorly the science community is in communicating accurate science information to the public. It's a complex task because it cannot be communicated in just sound bites for the evening news.
I wouldn't blame the science community for poor information dissemination. I would blame scientists who internalize an ideology that their political activism should be embedded in their life's work. I would blame environmental activists. I would blame the news delivery paradigm. I would blame the politicians who seek to benefit from fear and control.
Scientific theory can be complex. Climate theory certainly is complex. But, it remains unproven hypothesis. While I would advocate the obvious cautions, e.g. not defecating where you eat, the phase out of unreplaced carbon fuels in light of current knowledge would be a senseless and damaging act.
I think that there is however, a scientific reason for the control of carbon fuels that is the underlying reason for the false climate change scare....namely, the finite limits of carbon resources and the hockey stick population explosion. This climate change debate is a method of preparing for the inevitable changes that will be required of mankind, especially the western world. We need to conserve resources until other energy sources are developed. Scaring us about climate change is better than scaring us into hoarding and wars.