1. The understandings are simplistic - the science is anything but.
It's extremely complex, hence the room for misunderstandings, some of
them deliberate. And does your thesis also apply to other now broadly
accepted social concepts like 'smoking tends to kill you' and 'drunk
drivers kill people' - both of these are ideas that have taken hold
during my lifetime.
2. A few years ago? I was teaching the basic principles of
atmospheric modification 25 years ago and it's only recently become
the 'conventional wisdom of the dominant group' (cowdung). Of course,
we were also talking about acid rain and ozone layer damage then,
once equally contentious theories.
Andrew Fildes
afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
On 04/03/2009, at 9:38 AM, Moose wrote:
> primarily based on how it aligns with their political and/or
> religio-spiritual agendas, and moves into general public
> acceptance, is
> almost bound to turn out to be somewhere between over-simplistic and
> just plain wrong.
>
> I was wondering about the global cooling theories starting a few years
> ago, when the term started to become a catch phrase.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|