Here's another great example of the Right ignoring science and facts when they don't like them.
Peggy Noonan is pontificating on the failings of science in not reaching a consensus
on Global Warming.
how sad and frustrating it is that the world's greatest scientists cannot gather, discuss the question of global warming, pore over all the data from every angle, study meteorological patterns and temperature histories, and come to a believable conclusion on these questions: Is global warming real or not?
Wow, what a great idea! Let's get the greatest minds in the world together, have them look at the situation and then offer us advice on what we should be doing. Heck, how about we call it the International Panel on Climate Change?
Well, guess what, Peggy, its' already been done. The world's experts have gotten together, studied each others work, tested models and even
presented us with a report.
Most of the Right have rejected it because, and I'm quoting you, Peggy:
science too, like other great institutions, is poisoned by politics.
This is a statement that due to the nature of science can't be true.
This issue is not simple math, where 1+1 is quickly and easily understood. This problem is huge. Getting a complete grasp of the dynamics of the systems involved may be beyond what we are currently capable of. That doesn't mean the science is flawed, but you, like so many on the Right, use this natural limitation of science to raise doubts about any result that you don't like. Your agenda becomes not finding the truth, but protecting your position. To do this you slander the science and the scientists performing the studies.
The funny part is, so many on the Right are driven by a 'there is no Global Warming' and are busy denouncing the scientists involved as driven by an agenda. Guess what, Peggy, it doesn't matter if the scientists are or are not driven by an agenda. Good science can't be impacted by any agenda of those doing it.
Other scientists will study these findings, test them and build on them. In time, a consensus is reached and either the findings are valid or not valid. If the findings are not valid, then any agenda of the scientist is totally irrelevant. A single scientist, driven by agenda, could lie and cheat for a short while, but as his work was found to be flawed, his work (and his agenda) would be cast aside by the rest of the scientific community.
In the study of Global Warming, there is debate over mechanisms, meanings, long term projections and many of the small details. That Global Warming is actually occurring and mankind in a major factor in this process is no longer an issue for scientists.
And yet, Peggy, you and so many others on the Right pretend that the idea of Global Warming is still being debated. It's not.
You lie about the current state of affairs and then have the gall to say you can't trust scientists because they are driven an agenda and will lie to promote it.
Peggy, that is nothing but projection. You know you would lie (heck, you are doing it right here) to further *your* agenda, so you assume the scientists would also. But you seem to have forgotten some of the principals about science you should have learned in middle school.
You can't lie and do good science. If you try to do this, you will be exposed, removed, and made a laughingstock in the scientific community. It's a shame that the same thing can't be said of editorial writers.