Thursday, February 26, 2015

Proffessor on thin ice for doing his job

Of course, climate change is an ongoing process. However, disagreeing with the established narrative is apparently enough to warrant investigation for some, such as Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. The professor has found that trying to research this issue is more trouble than it's worth, and is directing all of his future research efforts elsewhere. To put it simply, scientists are being silenced for daring to ask questions and reach a conclusion from their research.

Coming from the same government that has allowed the NSA to become what it is, I find this pretty unsurprising, although alarming all the same. What exactly does anyone gain from intimidating scientists? While devotion to the global warming narrative can be almost religious for some, certainly free speech should take priority? Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. obviously hasn't done anything wrong here; this is one instance where our polarized politics are without a doubt proving to be harmful to the country itself.

To what extent has climate change become somewhat of a pseudo-religious topic in America? Why is there a lack of room for debate in this field? If this kind of witch hunting goes unchecked, will we need additional legislation to protect our freedom of speech? What do you think about this?


Scott Silton said...

For a balanced if lengthy review of Dr. Pielke's situation, check out:

LGM being a progressive academic blog (and Paul Campos a particularly insightful writer) gives me some confidence in his analysis, which amounts to an acknowledgement that this researcher has been unfairly lumped together with hacks while also pointing out the hyperbole of comparing his treatment to McCarthyism. Seems to me that this story is a smokescreen for the recent revelation that a prominent climate change skeptic was taking large sums of money from the energy industry. Pielke sounds like someone who dissents from the climate change majority more as a matter of degree and is not a wholesale climate change denier.

Murray Sandmeyer said...

I don't think there is a lack of debate on climate change; I think there is a lack of respect between those who disagree on the topic. The left often criticizes the right for holding to religious beliefs about the permanence of nature and the right often throws accusations of tree-hugging and a lack of pragmatism for the status quo of energy. It's not wise to add pseudo-religion to the mix.