No need to panic about global warming
The article begins with the introduction of a declaration by 16 scientists that addresses the issues of those seeking democratic candidacy and their focus on global warming. As opposed to contrary belief, they argue that there is no compelling need to take any action to stop the Global Warming situation. In addition, a Nobel Prize winning physicist named Ivar Giaever withdrew his membership from the American Physical Society due to this organizations steadfast support of similar doctrines. The organization wanted to show that the evidence to support global warming was incontrovertible, while the physicist seemed to agree otherwise.
The article then attempts to portray issues such as these in the science community as methods of “cui bono” or ways to make money. The argument within the entire article is that there is an air of alarmism that is being inflicted on the general populous to a certain degree. It is argued that this alarmism offers an excuse for governments and businesses to work the political system and lure people into making unnecessary expenditures.
The lack of a need to panic about global warming issues is showing that the article argues that the previous trend towards “shock value” is not the way that science is supposed to work. The reason being was that there simply aren’t the proper amounts or types of scientific evidence that can prove much. In fact, it is the institution of science alarmism that has contributed to the collection of many various stubborn scientific facts. This in turn has created many labeled as heretics within the science community, a sort of if “if you are not with us, your against us” mentality.