Friday, January 19, 2007

Global Warming: Giving Darwin a Run for His Money

Forget where we've it's about where we're heading.

One of the most consistent tactics of liberalism is the rewriting of history to manufacture support for what they want to do. Secular humanists have spent the last 150 years diligently rewriting history (and "other animals" which preceeded him) by promoting the pseudo-scientific myth of Darwinian Macroevolution. It was certainly pervasive and persistent enough to see the Haeckel Chart appearing in school textbooks even well after they had been proven a hoax. While there continues to be a growing chorus of dissent among the scientific community as to the viability of the prevalent Darwinian Macroevolutionary theories (and, ironically, it is self-defeating as it increasingly fails to adapt fast enough to maintain plausibility), it is still a concept firmly entrenched in the America psyche as fact.

Well, they are no longer content to sit fixated on that issue any longer. Continuing down the path of pantheistic nature-worship, they are now fighting to establish the Global Warming Theory as irrefutable fact. A major salvo was launched this past month by Dr. Heidi Cullen of The Weather Channel. In one of her recent blog posts, Dr. Cullen stated her belief that the American Meteorological Society (AMS) should withdraw their "Seal of Approval" from any meteorologist who does not tow the party line in subscribing to and publicly supporting the Global Warming Theory should have their "Seal of Approval" revoked. The statement generated quite an outcry, and in a subsequent blog post she stated the following:
I've read all your comments saying I want to silence meteorologists who are skeptical of the science of global warming. That is not true. The point of my post was never to stifle discussion. It was to raise it to a level that doesn't confuse science and politics. Freedom of scientific expression is essential.
Actually, Dr. Cullen, you stated that those meteorologists who expressed such skepticism of the Global Warming Theory were unable to "distinguish between solid, peer-reviewed science and junk political controversy." In other words, you are free to be a skeptic all you long as you keep your mouth shut.

She goes on to say: "Many of you have accused me and The Weather Channel of taking a political position on global warming. That is not our intention. " Dr. Cullen, you ARE making it political by your ridicule and advocacy of punitive actions for those who dare disagree with you.

Yes, we are well aware of the AMS's public position on Global Warming, but perhaps you should also read their Statement on Freedom of Scientific Expression:

Advances in science and the benefits of science to policy, technological progress, and society as a whole depend upon the free exchange of scientific data and information as well as on open debate. The ability of scientists to present their findings to the scientific community, policy makers, the media, and the public without censorship, intimidation, or political interference is imperative. With the specific limited exception of proprietary information or constraints arising from national security, scientists must be permitted unfettered communication of scientific results. In return, it is incumbent upon scientists to communicate their findings in ways that portray their results and the results of others, objectively, professionally, and without sensationalizing or politicizing the associated impacts.

Contrary to Dr. Cullen's bluster, this is all about politics. Take a minute to read Melanie Morgan's article on the political leanings of The Weather Channel over at WorldNetDaily, and ABC-TV's AMS-certified meteorologist Marc Morano in his response to Dr. Cullen's call for decertification.

Labels: ,


Post a Comment

<< Home