Leonard Pitts Jr. recently wrings his hands over a lack of critical thinking among conservatives (Feb. 21). Pitts culls through his e-mails to find some low hanging fruit to offer up as an example. Ken Thompson certainly put himself in Pitts’ crosshairs with his e-mail on Henry Johnson.
Pitts appoints Thompson as a poster boy for fact-averse, conservative trolls, who “still don't believe the president was born in Hawaii or that the planet is warming." Pitts' unstated assumption? Honorable people may ascertain the truthfulness of anthropogenic global warming assertions as easily as they may ascertain the truth of Johnson's heroics or Obama's birthplace.
But what makes an assertion a "fact" as opposed to mere opinion lies in our ability to empirically determine its truth or falsity. Both 2+2 = 4 and 2+3 = 7 qualify as facts on that basis.
Global warming assertions rise to the level of facts only if they lend themselves to an empirical determination of their truth or falsity.
That AGW enthusiasts have lent themselves to years and years of reckless hyperbole, shameless data manipulation, outright fraud and a constant repression of dissent which leads me to two possible conclusions. One, climate data’s complexities defy analysis and therefore proof, or two, no significant data supports AGW alarmist claims. In the first case, AGW’s claims remain opinion; in the second, AGW’s claims ring false.
I will continue to debate the truth or falsity of global warming assertions despite Pitts’ sly attempt to shame me to silence.
Lenny Hoy, Greenwood