Saturday, November 15, 2014

Ed Achorn and the "Armies of the Night"

of non-fiction science essays including 
"Armies of the Night" written by 
Isaac Asimov in 1983.
Like abortion and gay marriage climate change is not my favorite topic to think about or comment on. It does not yet arouse my emotions in the same way as unacceptable social inequality- or, Mr. Achorn, fairness to that TWICE CONVICTED FELON, Vincent "Buddy" Cianci.

But at least Cianci's jail time was a fact not a theory. And here is where Ed Achorn is mistaken in this controversy. He is willing to publish both sides of the controversy while clearly leaning in favor of the climate deniers and their "courageous dissent". But like EVOLUTION science has accepted climate change-caused by humans-as a fact not a theory.

It does take courage (or just a warped ego) indeed to argue for Creationism in a room full of professional biologists and ecologists but you are not arguing science.

The equal space given to climate deniers in the increasingly reactionary Providence Journal (Ed Achorn could also "edit" Red Eye Radio) deceives the declining number of your readers into believing that scientists themselves cannot agree on climate change. Nothing could be further from the truth.

I just reviewed a You Tube video of the late great science writer, Isaac Asimov, explaining way back in 1989 why global warming-caused by human activity- was the big science news of the year. If Isaac were alive today he would view Mr. Achorn as he did the Christian fundamentalist Creationist in his essay "The Armies of the Night".

Link to Asimov's 1989 video on YouTube
The climate change denying SCIENTISTS are rarely specialists in climate change with their published articles reviewed by peers. They ARE invariably the pets of many ruling class corporate executives ( mostly Energy people ) who are stupefied by the threat to big business profits.

Show me a professional climate change denier with no suspicious investments, Mr. Achorn?


No comments:

Post a Comment

Comments that are courteous, concise and relevant are always welcome, whether or not they agree with the views expressed here or not. Profanity is not necessary. Thank you for reading “Time Enough At Last!”

Ron