- Decisions coming soon on steel mill, smelter in New Madrid (11/17/17)1
- Cape man accused of secretly recording women, posting to porn site (11/22/17)
- Thankful People: Kirsten Strebe recovers from traumatic car accident, brain injury (11/23/17)
- Cape attorney Brandon Cooper to run for judge (11/20/17)2
- Thankful People: Moore family counts its blessing after harrowing accident (11/23/17)
- Cape native co-directs Thanksgiving-related indie film, 'Drinksgiving' (11/17/17)
- State audit: Bollinger County tax levies violate state law; county commission disagrees (11/17/17)3
- Deal Finder brings 'unique' shopping to Cape Girardeau (11/24/17)
- The Tungsten Groove to release first album featuring original songs (11/17/17)
- 1 dead, 3 hurt in accident on Highway 72 (11/19/17)
Obscure view promoted as disagreement
To the editor:
A White House spokesman recently berated a reporter for "living in a reality-based world." "We live in an empire now," the spokesman continued. "We make our own reality." When scientific consensus denies politics, Republicans advance the Luntz strategy in congressional hearings and communications. They find an obscure minority view and promote it as though disagreement exists. This publication usually follows suit.
That Holmes Jenkins is an editorial board writer for The Wall Street Journal testifies to his writing skills but confers upon him zero expertise on climate-change science (Southeast Missourian, Feb. 5). Neither does it prevent him arguing the dangerously uninformed opinion that significant doubt exists about global warming and its cause.
To undermine the straw man that there is no proof of a connection, Jenkins displays scientific ignorance. In science, we cannot provide proof in the sense of absolute certainty. Just like physicians, scientists can only offer conclusions based on what the evidence suggests. That global warming is happening faster than at any time in Earth's history is unquestioned. That this is probably a consequence of human activity, though not certain, is also well-supported by the evidence. Jenkins' dismissal of computer models overlooks the fact that these are what allow us to reach into space.
In dismissing the consensus, Jenkins forgets that articles have not appeared in scientific journals endorsing his absurd view because, as the editor of the journal Science noted, they are neither written nor submitted. Where Jenkins seeks debate, none exists.
ALAN JOURNET, Cape Girardeau