smiths wrote: .......the post modern idea that any idea as valid as the next.
Smiths, I'm with you, and I think that phrase above is the key statement to what you write. It's the key statement to make about post 2001 propaganda and culture.
"Any idea is as valid as the next".
Really, isn't that why we're here? To sort through the muck?
I find it very strange how people have taken sides on this issue.
Real science is not dogma. Real science is theory. The latest theory to explain things. The whole idea of science is to refine these, challenge them, find new and better explanations for the observation of the phenomona we see around us.
Yet everybody is digging in and taking sides on ..... science?
Any idea is certainly NOT as valid as the next in the world of science. That's the whole idea behind science. You throw out the bad, disproven ideas and move on.
I suppose the Global Warming scenario scares the shit out of people. It does me. There's nothing more destablizing, psychologically, than not knowing if any place is safe. Where are we supposed to go in the "warming world" scenario? What if we choose badly and end up in a wasteland that can't support human life?
I think more people would rather just deny what they see coming down the road, and hope it's not gonna happen.
"Denial" and "hope" are both extremely strong parts of the human psyche.
At the same time, I've had enough science in my background to know that the theories COULD be wrong. They could be faulty. The melting ice caps could be due to something other than man-made phenomona, but if so, we sure haven't figured out what it is yet.