Yes, Spindoc's contribution is expressed extraordinarily well.

In answer to Grim's question, I don't think it matters which side Spindoc is on, because the sentiment is universally applicable, however it is presented perfectly in this AGW context.

Well done Spindoc.

I love this bit - "I’m beginning to think that education and ego are no substitute for intelligence". Here I suspect Spindoc is being especially polite.

Let me assure you Spindoc that there is absolutely, beyond any shadow of a doubt, no direct positive relationship between education and intelligence in the modern western world. In fact currently I'm of the opinion that there could exist a proportionally inverse relationship between the two. Modern educational institutions, it seems to me, are intent on weeding out and rejecting anyone who dares to show spark and original thought, and won't comply with the dictated orthodoxy. AGW being a good example. Peer review I believe they call it. A way to quality control and provide assurance that the content is compliant with the accepted program, regime and dogma.

It's worth having a look at the Author's earlier contribution on climate change, to be found in "The Aztec Solution to Climate Change:

"Human sacrifice is clearly a potent forcing agent in climate equilibration. Furthermore, analysis of the climate record suggests its decline has been a key driver of rising global temperatures. The Aztec (and other) priests were right. Only sacrifice will ensure humankind’s survival.

Given this outcome, should there not be an independent review of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) perspective?"
http://www.quadrant.org.au/magazine/issue/2009/6/the-aztec-solution

I hope the author has taken the time to mail copies of his Quadrant essay to all members of the IPCC. When everyone has heard the message, then will the old world end, and the new world begin.

Poirot, Grim
By repeating the fallacies I have identified in your argument - authority and circularity - you are only proving my case, not yours.

spindoc
"The instant science is politicized it is corrupted..."

Indeed. And how could it be not politicized when it is funded by government? Since the whole purpose of government funding is that it *not* be funded on the basis of profit and loss, on what basis could it be funded but arbitrary political opinion? It's no use asserting, as Poirot's astrophysicist reference asserts, that it's done on "merits". The question is, how to know it merits funding? The science doesn't supply the value judgment. The assertion is scientific illiteracy.

Without any rational means of knowing how to produce science as a good (rational in terms of the evaluations of consumers), government has no alternative than to produce it as a bad. The scientist becomes a government functionary. To ignore the question of knowledge and human interests, as the entire warmist movement does, to pretend that the production of knowledge in these circumstances is entirely unproblematic when that is precisely what's in issue, is distinctly *unscientific* on first principles of social science! It is either ludicrous credulity, or culpable dishonesty.

"Why have so many apparently well educated people been drawn into this mess?"
Indeed. You have to ask: are they so dumb that they believe what they're saying - for example, Poirot's and Grim's persistence in fallacies? Or are they being deliberately dishonest?

At base, the phenomenon requiring explanation is psychological. My own take is that we are seeing a resurgence of religious belief that parallels traditional Christian catastrophism on virtually every point.

The early conclusion of the Test Match has clearly provided the thinkers with a spare day to contemplate higher matters!

Michael, our children do seem to be both vulnerable and perhaps, unwilling participants in this whole AGW movement. What is of great concern is that the political elites, educators, academics and bureaucrats appear to be the very groups both setting the “dumbed down curriculum” and promoting the “socialization of science”.

If you are correct voxUnius and there is no correlation between education and intelligence, then our societies are in deep doodoo, as we appear to have the fox supervising the proverbial chicken coop (children’s education), unless of course someone could nominate any institution on the planet that actually teaches intelligence?

Is it not curious that it is predominantly the self declared “intelligencia” who appear to be the most committed and vocal in proselytizing this AGW phenomenon?

Perhaps this supports the view of voxUnius that there exists a proportionally inverse “gullibility” relationship between the educated and those claiming intelligence?

One thing appears certain; the advocacy block seems to have a formidable strangle hold on our societies. Fascinating, the King has no clothes but the show goes on.

It is beyond belief that you guys are casting doubt on the reality of climate change, or AGW if you want to call it that. We have about three years to turn the situation around and you guys are bickering about whether it's happening or not. When you next have 57 minutes (maybe today - the Test finished a day early) you should have a look at this presentation by Professor Kevin Anderson:
http://www.slideshare.net/DFID/professor-kevin-anderson-climate-change-going-beyond-dangerous
...and be scared, be very scared. I am.

Time to move on was four years ago. Sometimes common sense does not hit the spot for reasons of self interest. Just like Toni. All of this no, is doing nothing but hold the progress of change up. If we do not get off oil and coal, we will end up like the rest of the broke world. To deny any effects from burning fossil fuel, is to deny a future, as we know it. We are lucky to have a strong govt; in the face of a hung parliament, to put strong measures in place that will get the ball rolling. Other nations will pick up the ball when they get some spare cash. The object here is to move in that direction, while we can without , it becoming compulsory. Nuclear is not an option.