Since the beginning of the latest climate change “discussion” that is going on in the media, I have contended that the “scientists” who are most vocal about climate change are those who had already determined their positions well before any real research had been done.
An article from RedOrbit (I’ve never heard of it either) serves to prove my point. The article contains extensive quotations by Anthony Leiserowitz, a professor of environmental studies at the University of Oregon, speaking at a talk during the American Association for the Advancement of Science annual meeting.
Professor Lieserowitz discusses the contents of a book, Creating a Climate for Change: Communicating Climate Change – Facilitating Social Change, of which he was a contributor.
Just read the title. I think we already know the conclusions the professor has drawn. And now, through this book and consensual science, he is disregarding science and allowing emotion to skew any shadow of accuracy that may be contained in both his book and his comments.
Here is a quotation from the article:
“We found no references, no associations, of the impacts of climate change on either human health or extreme weather events. Yet these are, arguably, among the most important potential impacts, because, ultimately, the consequences are going hurt people.
See what he did there? He assumed unproven consequences backed up by unproven science, and he assumed that those unproven consequences are definitively negative.
He says that certain potential impacts are arguabley going to cause consequences that will definitely hurt people. He didn’t say “the consequences have the potential to hurt people.” He said “the consequences ARE going to hurt people.
Professor, I have two words for you: Prove it.