6 aug. 2010

National Post: Förnekarna skadar konservatismen

National Post är en konservativ Kanadensisk tidning som figurerat ofta i klimatdebatten - på den klimatskeptiska sidan. Därför är det värt att uppmärksamma ledarkolumnen av Jonathan Kay den 15 juli:
Have you heard about the “growing number” of eminent scientists who reject the theory that man-made greenhouse gases are increasing the earth’s temperature? It’s one of those factoids that, for years, has been casually dropped into the opening paragraphs of conservative manifestos against climate-change treaties and legislation.
...
How has this tiny 2-3% sliver of fringe opinion been reinvented as a perpetually “growing” share of the scientific community? Most climate-change deniers (or “skeptics,” or whatever term one prefers) tend to inhabit militantly right-wing blogs and other Internet echo chambers populated entirely by other deniers. In these electronic enclaves — where a smattering of citations to legitimate scientific authorities typically is larded up with heaps of add-on commentary from pundits, economists and YouTube jesters who haven’t any formal training in climate sciences — it becomes easy to swallow the fallacy that the whole world, including the respected scientific community, is jumping on the denier bandwagon.

This is a phenomenon that should worry not only environmentalists, but also conservatives themselves: The conviction that global warming is some sort of giant intellectual fraud now has become a leading bullet point within mainstream North American conservatism; and so has come to bathe the whole movement in its increasingly crankish, conspiratorial glow.

Conservatives often pride themselves on their hard-headed approach to public-policy — in contradistinction to liberals, who generally are typecast as fuzzy-headed utopians. Yet when it comes to climate change, many conservatives I know will assign credibility to any stray piece of junk science that lands in their inbox … so long as it happens to support their own desired conclusion. (One conservative columnist I know formed her skeptical views on global warming based on testimonials she heard from novelist Michael Crichton.) The result is farcical: Impressionable conservatives who lack the numeracy skills to perform long division or balance their checkbooks feel entitled to spew elaborate proofs purporting to demonstrate how global warming is in fact caused by sunspots or flatulent farm animals.

...

Rants and slogans may help conservatives deal with the emotional problem of cognitive dissonance. But they aren’t the building blocks of a serious ideological movement. And the impulse toward denialism must be fought if conservatism is to prosper in a century when environmental issues will assume an ever greater profile on this increasingly hot, parched, crowded planet. Otherwise, the movement will come to be defined — and discredited — by its noisiest cranks and conspiracists.

Kanske är förnekarna på väg ut i den politiska periferin även på andra sidan Atlanten. Låt oss hoppas det.

4 kommentarer:

  1. Det är lite lustigt på ett tragiskt sätt att läsa att många av kommentarerna till artikeln så perfekt bekräftar vad Jonathan Kay skriver.

    SvaraRadera
  2. Detta är nog den värsta hemsidan/bloggen som rör vad som påstås hända i atmosfären och med den globala temperaturen.

    Jag trodde, baserat på "Uppsalainitiativet" att detta var en seriös sida, men så är inte fallet. Detta är också tydligt då man ser det låga antalet kommentarer.

    Tack och hej. Jag söker nu vidare efter relevant, mer objektiv information.

    SvaraRadera
  3. Anonym,
    Det finns gott om mycket värre bloggar än den här. Det lär du nog snart upptäcka.
    Och antalet kommentarer är tyvärr ingen bra kvalitetsindikator.

    SvaraRadera

Tips: Använd gärna signatur när du kommenterar. Det underlättar samtalet