Diz a wikipedia a este respeito:
«The global warming controversy concerns the public debate over whether global warming is occurring, how much has occurred in modern times, what has caused it, what its effects will be, whether any action should be taken to curb it, and if so what that action should be. In the scientific literature, there is a strong consensus that global surface temperatures have increased in recent decades and that the trend is caused by human-induced emissions of greenhouse gases.[2][3][4][5][6][7] No scientific body of national or international standing disagrees with this view,[8] though a few organizations with members in extractive industries hold non-committal positions.[9] Disputes over the key scientific facts of global warming are more prevalent in the media than in the scientific literature, where such issues are treated as resolved, and more prevalent in the United States than globally.[10][11]
[...]
Global warming remains an issue of widespread political debate, often split along party political lines, especially in the United States.[13] Many of the issues that are settled within the scientific community, such as human responsibility for global warming, remain the subject of politically or economically motivated attempts to downplay, dismiss or deny them—an ideological phenomenon categorised by academics and scientists as climate change denial. The sources of funding for those involved with climate science—both supporting and opposing mainstream scientific positions—have been questioned by both sides. There are debates about the best policy responses to the science, their cost-effectiveness and their urgency. Climate scientists, especially in the United States, have reported official and oil-industry pressure to censor or suppress their work and hide scientific data, with directives not to discuss the subject in public communications. Legal cases regarding global warming, its effects, and measures to reduce it have reached American courts. The fossil fuels lobby has been identified as overtly or covertly supporting efforts to undermine or discredit the scientific consensus on global warming.[14][15]»
Parece-me que a wikipedia descreve bem o debate entre aqueles que defendem a posição consensual, e os críticos do consenso: um debate mediático que é alimentado em grande medida pela indústria de combustíveis fósseis, já que na comunidade científica que estuda o tema ele tem muito pouca expressão, dada a força das provas em favor da posição consensual.
O debate entre os cientistas que apoiam a teoria consensual, pelo contrário, pode ser bastante dinâmico e aceso. Ironicamente, até é por vezes usado, com cuidado de o tirar do contexto, para desacreditar a comunidade científica.
Já o debate entre muitos dos críticos do consenso científico parece revelar muito pouco espírito crítico. Rotineiramente, informações erradas, desadequadas, contraditórias são apresentadas sem qualquer tipo de cuidado ou rebate. Um exemplo a esse respeito é apresentado e comentado por potholer54:
Post também publicado no Espaço Ágora.
«The global warming controversy concerns the public debate over whether global warming is occurring, how much has occurred in modern times, what has caused it, what its effects will be, whether any action should be taken to curb it, and if so what that action should be. In the scientific literature, there is a strong consensus that global surface temperatures have increased in recent decades and that the trend is caused by human-induced emissions of greenhouse gases.[2][3][4][5][6][7] No scientific body of national or international standing disagrees with this view,[8] though a few organizations with members in extractive industries hold non-committal positions.[9] Disputes over the key scientific facts of global warming are more prevalent in the media than in the scientific literature, where such issues are treated as resolved, and more prevalent in the United States than globally.[10][11]
[...]
Global warming remains an issue of widespread political debate, often split along party political lines, especially in the United States.[13] Many of the issues that are settled within the scientific community, such as human responsibility for global warming, remain the subject of politically or economically motivated attempts to downplay, dismiss or deny them—an ideological phenomenon categorised by academics and scientists as climate change denial. The sources of funding for those involved with climate science—both supporting and opposing mainstream scientific positions—have been questioned by both sides. There are debates about the best policy responses to the science, their cost-effectiveness and their urgency. Climate scientists, especially in the United States, have reported official and oil-industry pressure to censor or suppress their work and hide scientific data, with directives not to discuss the subject in public communications. Legal cases regarding global warming, its effects, and measures to reduce it have reached American courts. The fossil fuels lobby has been identified as overtly or covertly supporting efforts to undermine or discredit the scientific consensus on global warming.[14][15]»
Parece-me que a wikipedia descreve bem o debate entre aqueles que defendem a posição consensual, e os críticos do consenso: um debate mediático que é alimentado em grande medida pela indústria de combustíveis fósseis, já que na comunidade científica que estuda o tema ele tem muito pouca expressão, dada a força das provas em favor da posição consensual.
O debate entre os cientistas que apoiam a teoria consensual, pelo contrário, pode ser bastante dinâmico e aceso. Ironicamente, até é por vezes usado, com cuidado de o tirar do contexto, para desacreditar a comunidade científica.
Já o debate entre muitos dos críticos do consenso científico parece revelar muito pouco espírito crítico. Rotineiramente, informações erradas, desadequadas, contraditórias são apresentadas sem qualquer tipo de cuidado ou rebate. Um exemplo a esse respeito é apresentado e comentado por potholer54:
Post também publicado no Espaço Ágora.
Mensagens
Sem comentários :
Enviar um comentário