Recently, I was invited to share some thoughts regarding issues in Iraq with a large group of undergraduate students involved in tackling global policy issues. As part of the discussion, I asked the group, How many of you have taken or intend to take any history classes as part of your undergraduate education?
One student raised his hand.
Today I read a piece by a junior studying journalism on the media fail(ing) to accurately cover climate change. Before reading the piece I was intrigued that perhaps this budding journalist might be inclined to delve into the serious questions being posed about global warming and mankind's contribution to the phenomena. Sadly, what I read was a propaganda piece that echoed old news in the scientific community.
While the controversial issues in 'mankind-induced' climate change are many, I would mention here just two, which sadly, the writer apparently failed to research for his background. The first would be from John Christy, professor of atmospheric science at University of Alabama, Huntsville, and a former lead author on the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) who now questions the accuracy of the temperature data sets because of the influence on the measuring stations by local factors like land development. The second would be the historical fact that long before the industrial revolution, between the 11th and 14th centuries, the Norse (Vikings) lived and farmed Southern Greenland (including the raising of grazing livestock) in areas long since covered in snow and ice. The so-called Medieval Warm Period occurred during this time. These two examples only touch the tip of the iceberg when it comes to serious and compelling facts that seem to question the dogma of global warming adherents.
The bottom line is that the writer of this piece is being done a disservice. He has been in college for some time and yet seems to understand nothing of real science. For a real scientist, it doesn't matter whether or not the globe is cooling or heating. The reality is that temperature has cycled since the earth was formed and human beings have endured far higher temperatures than those of today and have done just fine. What really matters in science is the accuracy of the data and the skepticism and testing of hypotheses. Real science, and I would suggest real journalism
is never inclined to use terms like unequivocal. Absolutes like this are actually propaganda, based in an appeal to fear, and not based in truth-serving objectivity.
This Ohio University undergraduate writer, if he is the norm, shows us just how poorly our college students are being prepared for serious work. They are not being compelled to do careful investigation, they are not being taught classical scientific methods and skepticism, they are not being taught how to write in a balanced and referenced fashion, they are ignorant of history and ultimately they are prone to a style of communication that parrots ideology and not the untainted truth. Incredibly, for this lack of a classical liberal education, they are being charged a small fortune in tuition and fees.
If Ohio University considers this product a good one, then I would suggest that Dr. McDavis, and everyone working and studying at OU, has far greater things to be concerned about than a $13.75 million dollar cut.
Todd Fredricks resides in Athens County. 4
Opinion
