The Economist Looks At Climategate

An interesting article and one that tries to comprehend what could be one of the greatest scandals in the history of humanity:

“WHAT is truth?” That was Pontius Pilate’s answer to Jesus’s assertion that “Everyone that is of the truth heareth my voice.” It sounds suspiciously like the modern argument over climate change.

A majority of the world’s climate scientists have convinced themselves, and also a lot of laymen, some of whom have political power, that the Earth’s climate is changing; that the change, from humanity’s point of view, is for the worse; and that the cause is human activity, in the form of excessive emissions of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide. A minority, though, are sceptical. Some think that recent, well-grounded data suggesting the Earth’s average temperature is rising are explained by natural variations in solar radiation, and that this trend may be coming to an end. Others argue that longer-term evidence that modern temperatures are higher than they have been for hundreds or thousands of years is actually too flaky to be meaningful.

Such disagreements are commonplace in science. They are eventually settled by the collection of more data and the invention of more refined (or entirely new) theories. Arguments may persist for decades; academics may—and often do—sling insults at each other; but it does not matter a great deal because the stakes are normally rather low.

As soon as the left adopted phrases like "denier" or turned warming into one of their ludicrous litmus tests on who is good or bad, the debate went from the normal give and take into something far more sinister. For me personally, it was the exploitation of Katrina by Al Gore to make an "unproven connection" as the starting point of my skepticism. What strikes me the most about the whole debate was that I am quite willing to trust the scientists, but I am sure as heck not going to trust politicians and interest groups who clearly have ulterior motives in regards to our money and freedoms. As for the Economist, well they are getting there:

This newspaper believes that global warming is a serious threat, and that the world needs to take steps to try to avert it. That is the job of the politicians. But we do not believe that climate change is a certainty. There are no certainties in science. Prevailing theories must be constantly tested against evidence, and refined, and more evidence collected, and the theories tested again. That is the job of the scientists. When they stop questioning orthodoxy, mankind will have given up the search for truth. The sceptics should not be silenced.(Emphasis Mine)

Its a start.