Coming today from the Wall Street Journal's Bret Stephens, on the subject of global warming climate change.
Consider the case of global warming, another system of doomsaying prophecy and faith in things unseen.
As with religion, it is presided over by a caste of spectacularly unattractive people pretending to an obscure form of knowledge that promises to make the seas retreat and the winds abate. As with religion, it comes with an elaborate list of virtues, vices and indulgences. As with religion, its claims are often non-falsifiable, hence the convenience of the term "climate change" when thermometers don't oblige the expected trend lines. As with religion, it is harsh toward skeptics, heretics and other "deniers." And as with religion, it is susceptible to the earthly temptations of money, power, politics, arrogance and deceit.
Deceit? How about How about the climategate emails, versions 1.0 and 2.0? Arrogance? How about Phil Jones of East Anglia University and Michael Mann of Penn State? Money? How about James Hansen of NASA? Power, politics? How about the oracle himself, Al Gore?
Speaking of Mr. Gore, there is a legal aphorism that at least this site attributes to him:
When the law is on your side, argue the law. When the facts are on your side, argue the facts. When neither the law or the facts are on your side, hollar.
Given that Al Gore has been doing a lot more "hollaring" than arguing, perhaps the laws (of science) and the facts are not really on his side.
Exit Question: Will Jon Huntsman need to "revise and extend" his own remarks on the topic?
HUNTSMAN: Listen, when you make comments that fly in the face of what 98 out of 100 climate scientists have said, when you call into question the science of evolution, all I'm saying is that, in order for the Republican Party to win, we can't run from science.
Politicians govern by concensus. Scientists don't.