Some believe that all truth and reality are subjective. This is a false belief. Truth does not care if you choose to ignore it. No amount of unbelief in the law of gravity is going to change the consequences of jumping off a cliff.
Well, in science you better not call something a truth that is only rooted in a philosophy or belief, no matter how authoritative the source.
Years ago, a church messed around with the domain of astronomy by pronouncing that the earth was the center of the universe. Being as this church used its authority to impose its dogma on the state, people suffered. Those who publicly challenged this dogma were even branded as heretics, and were persecuted for their beliefs.
Nowadays, many scientists are calling anthropogenic global warming, "an inconvenient truth." Some have even advocated silencing heretics who challenge this "truth." Most of these same scientists wish to use the power of the state to reverse the alleged consequences of this "truth." Sounds like dogma to me. Sounds like their proposed prescriptions might be worse than the illness.
However, giving these scientists the benefit of the doubt I ask, "why not adapt?" Here in Canada, we are liable to have a net benefit from global warming. More arable land, an open northwest passage, and a more moderate climate would be welcome by many a Canadian and tourist alike. Also, needing less fuel to heat our homes may result in cleaner air.
Most animals can adapt too. Some won't. My thoughts drift to a photo of a bunch of "stranded" polar bears on an iceberg. Its not like polar bears haven't ended up on icebergs before. If some bears are so dumb they don't know when to get off, maybe they deserve to be removed from the gene pool.
In a future blog, I'll discuss a legitimate place for dogma.