Are Environmentalists Arrogant? Fanatical?
Frequent commenter MarcoPolo writes: People should be entitled to express their opinions (humbly or otherwise), without being afraid of ridicule and abuse from arrogant eco-fanatics.
Well, first, you may want to rethink your position that environmentalists are “arrogant eco-fanatics.” What’s the value of being so nasty and so unfair? It’s no better than saying that African-Americans are “shiftless”; it only serves to broadcast one’s bigotry and ignorance.From there, let me say that I don’t have a problem with opinions that conflict with mine, though I’m not as sanguine on assertions that conflict with fact.
This might be a sign of a feeble imagination on my part, but I really don’t understand how people can seriously hold a thought on a certain subject that flies in the teeth of what scientists tell us. I honestly cannot imagine having a theory on the origins of the universe, the evolution of life on Earth, the cause of and cure for cancer, the best way to deal with ingrown toenails–or anything else–that differs from what we read from the scientists who have spent their entire adult lives studying these respective areas.
Craig,
Let me begin by saying how much I appreciate the photo !
However, c’mon Craig, it’s a cheap shot to deliberately misquote me.
I never said “environmentalists are “arrogant Eco-fanatics.” , (I consider myself an environmentalist). What I said was “arrogant eco-fanatics.” a whole different species !
You seem to be in awe of scientists, elevating these individuals to Olympian heights and endowing them with infallibility !
History, or even the history of our own life time teaches us that science, like most fields of human endevour, has it’s fair share of crooks, charlatans,delusional cranks, the just plain wrong, stubborn and includes ambitious criminals.
Nor are scientists united. Most scientists dissent, disagree and squabble about everything. (that’s part of the ethos, to constantly challenge existing knowledge).
Even when the science is basically accurate, the application may be not fully understood. What works in a laboratory, may not be extrapolated to real world conditions.
In 1951, a self taught researcher Alan Purcell, wrote a book challenging conventional scientific and medical understand of duodenal ulcers.
Because the individual had no formal training, his theories on types of bacteria were ignored and both himself and his book were long forgotten.
Thirty years later, two Australian doctors accidentally discovered the true cause of stomach ulcer was caused by the Helicobacter pylori bacterium. This discovery completely overturned all previously held explanation, including those scientists who spent the lives dedicated to studying stomach ulcers.
The number of serious, highly qualified peer-reviewed, articles papers and books written over the years on the subject could fill a library. They all have one thing in common, they are all completely wrong !
This is just a small example.
Only a short time ago, Phrenology was considered to be a serious science, with many highly reputable scientists subscribing to it’s veracity.
Even famous researchers like Dr Carl Sagan and Dr William McBride were found guilty of fraud. Others like the scientist behind the Dow Corning scandal, and Dr Paul Brodeur created the loss of hundreds of millions of dollars from their inaccurate claims.
How about Dr Robert Slutsky, the fraudulent University of California researcher, who covered up his scientific fraud for years by persuading more prominent scientists to put their names on his articles.
None of this means scientists should not be accorded respect and recognition for their endevours, just not adulation.