The
prognosis on the climate isn't good - but I’m fed up with the
alarmist way of presenting it. Those environmental scientists
(they all ride under the science banner) are under the burden of
producing results for their scientific degrees and professional
recognition, and - I dare to say - many of them are just users of
the powerful statistical software producing nice colorful graphs.
Many of them - I dare to say - don’t have professional
responsibility, not to mention social conscience.
Take
a look on the graph below. How could someone with any social
responsibility release a graph like that to a general public
without explaining all the "ifs" built into the
hypothesis? The "ifs" holding for the next thirty-six
years? Here, of course, I assume that the authors of the graph do
understand the software they are using. And more importantly, do
authors understand that there are people who make social
decisions, like politicians, based on a graph like this one? Or,
maybe, the graph is made just for BAH (The festival of Bad Ad Hoc
hypotheses).
Besides,
scaring politicians and social workers with the apocalyptic
scenarios isn’t a smart way to help them to do their job.