Open Letter in Opposition to ‘Global Warming’ Indoctrination
Written by Rosie Langridge
The need to counter ‘global warming’ indoctrination becomes ever more urgent. I suggest taking just one element of the agenda and aiming to create doubt in the minds of those taken in by it.
Chipping away at the brain washing seems to be more effective than launching broadsides. So enraging is the entire issue that this is often easier said than done, but, by following my own advice, I recently had a letter published in the magazine ‘Philosophy Now’.
Here is my letter:
I wish to express my consternation that a professor of philosophy, Wendy Lynne Lee, should support the value-laden term ‘climate change denier’ (‘Dewey & Climate Denial’ in Issue 135). She does not define this concept, but a ‘climate change denier’ would appear to be anyone who questions the assumptions that (a) the planet is heating up unusually, and (b) that this is caused primarily by CO2 emitted by the burning of fossil fuels. These are matters of scientific observation which may or may not be true. However, if a person may not question them without condemnation, what becomes of Karl Popper’s principle of falsifiability ?
Worst of all, perhaps, the word ‘denier’ is habitually associated with ‘holocaust denier’. The application of the term is to imply an appalling moral deficit. Those who wish to live in a peaceful, reasonable and rational world should decry the use of the term ‘denier’.
Here’s the story:
Philosophy Now is a well-established magazine based in London.
Wendy Lynn Lee is professor of philosophy at Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania but nonetheless her article is such a terrible muddle that it was hard to know where to begin a letter in response. I picked out what I see as the critical issue here, the attempt from many directions to close down any discussion of the ‘global warming’ agenda, be that by claiming/assuming that the science is ‘settled’, or by branding those who question as ‘deniers’. By contrast, philosophers should be the last people who cease to question.
As I was writing to a magazine dedicated to philosophy, I decided not to challenge the data, the science, the assumptions of warming, or even the twists and turns of her ‘reasoning’; instead I homed in on the philosophical arguments and was delighted to be published by the magazine in the following issue.
‘Philosophy Now’ is a very interesting magazine that I can recommend. It allows readers in some regions access to four articles free per month. Here are the links to the home page, the original article and to the relevant letters page:
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.