Nature published an important article this week reviewing the real state of climate science and attempting to put the email controversy into proper perspective. Unfortunately, I hold little hope (I’m cynical at times) that rational argument and systematic presentation of evidence will do anything to change the opinions of those who are naysayers. I think a large part of the problem lies in the disastrous choice of “global warming” as the moniker for climate change. For one thing, that name doesn’t sound all that bad. Warm goes well with fuzzy and slippers. You know, nice stuff. For another thing, anytime someone experiences any cold weather or snow, they tend to think “so much for global warming,” thereby reducing a complex science to a soundbite.
Another problem is that we are all too quick to take up battle positions. Soon, whenever someone expresses a love for bananas, orange lovers will attempt to smear that person’s reputation or worse. This is not a plea for a simplistic “why can’t we just all get along” way of life. Conflict doesn’t need to be negative, but we need to know when to step back and listen and consider the world as it is, not the way we’d like it to be. And that goes for me, too.
