Yes, the resurgence of the "climate-deniers" -- like weeds, or zombies -- is discouraging. But this resistance to scientific knowledge has a long history in the United States. Consider the enduring revolt by many conservative fundamentalists against Charles Darwin's theory of evolution.
Quick recap: Darwin's Origin of Species was published in 1859. The landmark Scopes trial (the basis for the play and the film, Inherit the Wind) took place in 1925 in the state of Tennessee, which sought to bar the teaching of evolution in its public schools. Fast forward 80 years: the dispute over the validity of evolutionary theory has infamously (embarrassingly) been carried into the 21st century by, among others, the Kansas State Board of Education, the Dover, Pennsylvania, school board, and now, according to The New York Times, state capitols in Kentucky, Oklahoma, and Texas.
It appears that these two strains of deniers -- those questioning climate change and evolution -- have joined forces to supplant scientific knowledge with religious zeal. Local politicians and certain conservative Christian organizations are categorizing both climate change and evolution as merely "theories" that should be presented to schoolchildren alongside alternative explanations.
Of course, evolution is a "theory" only in the formal, scientific sense: that is, "a well-substantiated explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can incorporate laws, hypotheses and facts," as was pointed out by the curators of the 2006 Darwin exhibition at the American Museum of Natural History in New York. This is in contrast to the more colloquial meaning of the word: "an untested hunch, or a guess without supporting evidence."
If one of the most well-documented theories in the annals of science -- a foundation of modern intellectual thought and of countless advances in the natural sciences -- can be questioned over the course of 151 years, should we really be shocked that the overwhelming evidence of human-induced climate change would also be disputed? This is especially true when you consider that the prevailing scientific consensus on climate change carries huge implications for powerful industries and entrenched economic and political stakeholders, who reap benefits -- in the short term, at least -- by fanning the flames of the Anti-Science/Anti-Knowledge movement in the United States.
None of this offers much consolation, but it does provide some historical perspective. Still, the basic challenge remains: how do we as a society enlighten -- or perhaps marginalize -- those who marginalize science, so that rational minds can prevail? Reverend Jim Ball, the senior director for climate programs at the Evangelical Environmental Network, who has worked with evangelical leaders and adherents to address climate change sensibly, told the Times that this group of religiously motivated skeptics "already feels like scientists are attacking their faith and calling them idiots."
The question, then, may be: How do we bridge this deep cultural divide in order to benefit the planet and all God's creatures who inhabit it?
Quick recap: Darwin's Origin of Species was published in 1859. The landmark Scopes trial (the basis for the play and the film, Inherit the Wind) took place in 1925 in the state of Tennessee, which sought to bar the teaching of evolution in its public schools. Fast forward 80 years: the dispute over the validity of evolutionary theory has infamously (embarrassingly) been carried into the 21st century by, among others, the Kansas State Board of Education, the Dover, Pennsylvania, school board, and now, according to The New York Times, state capitols in Kentucky, Oklahoma, and Texas.
It appears that these two strains of deniers -- those questioning climate change and evolution -- have joined forces to supplant scientific knowledge with religious zeal. Local politicians and certain conservative Christian organizations are categorizing both climate change and evolution as merely "theories" that should be presented to schoolchildren alongside alternative explanations.
Of course, evolution is a "theory" only in the formal, scientific sense: that is, "a well-substantiated explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can incorporate laws, hypotheses and facts," as was pointed out by the curators of the 2006 Darwin exhibition at the American Museum of Natural History in New York. This is in contrast to the more colloquial meaning of the word: "an untested hunch, or a guess without supporting evidence."
If one of the most well-documented theories in the annals of science -- a foundation of modern intellectual thought and of countless advances in the natural sciences -- can be questioned over the course of 151 years, should we really be shocked that the overwhelming evidence of human-induced climate change would also be disputed? This is especially true when you consider that the prevailing scientific consensus on climate change carries huge implications for powerful industries and entrenched economic and political stakeholders, who reap benefits -- in the short term, at least -- by fanning the flames of the Anti-Science/Anti-Knowledge movement in the United States.
None of this offers much consolation, but it does provide some historical perspective. Still, the basic challenge remains: how do we as a society enlighten -- or perhaps marginalize -- those who marginalize science, so that rational minds can prevail? Reverend Jim Ball, the senior director for climate programs at the Evangelical Environmental Network, who has worked with evangelical leaders and adherents to address climate change sensibly, told the Times that this group of religiously motivated skeptics "already feels like scientists are attacking their faith and calling them idiots."
The question, then, may be: How do we bridge this deep cultural divide in order to benefit the planet and all God's creatures who inhabit it?
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar