- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
I suppose by your definition of the word 'theory', well not yours but Jay Gould's, I stand corrected.
If comparatively speaking, the word 'theory' legitimizes it enough in your 'mind' to stand alongside the 'theory of relativity or the 'theory of evolution', then I would have to concede I mispoke. The 'Hypothesis' of global warming' might be a more accurate description. Semantics, yes I know. but in this era of redefining words to fit an agenda I think it's acceptable. Mr Gould states,"in the american vernacular 'theory' often means 'imperfect fact'. No, "theory' always means imperfect fact. It does'nt mean something else when it becomes inconvenient. Unless you're Bill Clinton. 'Theories' such as 'relativity' and 'evolution' have proved themselves to be more 'fact' than 'theory' (more semantics) at this point, due to years of ongoing scientific testing and research. Global warming, in my view, has hardly reached that hallmark. But I suppose you prefer the Wikipedia 'everybody says so, so it's gotta' be true' approach to validating research. In which case, any further discussion is pointless.
