Quote:
|
Originally Posted by raveneye
The usual talking point is that environmentalists are left-wing extremists who distort the science. Then at some point in the rant the term "environmentalist" gets replaced by "scientist".
Why that little switcheroo happens is a question for clinical psychologists.
|
No, the point is that left wing extremists have taken up the environmentalist mantel.
Most environmentalists are not scientists. I'm sure those idiots climbing on the coal ship thought of themselves as environmentalists, but I rather doubt any where scientists. The two are really mutually exclusive.
That being said, its not exactly difficult to get a degree in environmental sciences, and get the scientist label as well. I went to school for it myself, it actually had the lowest requirements to get in and pretty much anyone can get a masters or PhD and get the scientist label.
While some of the work was very good, I still got a laugh out of some of the masters thesises I read in the seminar room waiting for my night seminar to start. I think my favorite was on 'why birds hit plate glass windows'. Now this to me could have some value but his experimental design was, well comical.
I thought it might be about the avian eye, how to make windows more visible to birds etc, but no.
He put a piece of plate glass out in the middle of meadow and counted bird strikes. He then put various things behind it like a stuffed owl to see if they hit the window less.
That was pretty much it. That man, is a 'scientist' somewhere right now. In biology is sadly not that hard to be a 'scientist'.
But I mean, hey if the founder of Greenpeace thinks what I'm been saying all along is true, but Raveneye, internet guy thinks its for clinical psychologists, who am I to call you wrong?