Although Canada ranks as a top nation when it comes to scientific research, this just isn’t a characteristic shared by the Canadian government.
An editorial in the journal Nature this week provided a scathing critique of the current government.
Concerns can only be enhanced by the government’s manifest disregard for science. Since prime minister Stephen Harper came to power, his government has been sceptical of the science on climate change and has backed away from Canada’s Kyoto commitment. In January, it muzzled Environment Canada’s scientists, ordering them to route all media enquires through Ottawa to control the agency’s media message. Last week, the prime minister and members of the cabinet failed to attend a ceremony to honour the Canadian scientists who contributed to the international climate-change report that won a share of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize.
Their complete disregard for some pretty simple scientific issues is usually explained and justified by economic policies depending on energy production.
But Canadian voters have consistently ranked the environment as a top concern for them in all recent polls.Â
Julia Langer of WWF-Canada said,
Ontario voters are looking for leadership on environmental issues, creating an electorally significant swath of unclaimed green turf up for grabs if parties can distinguish themselves in the coming weeks. Ontario voters want clear, non-partisan information on what constitutes a solid environment platform and we are ready to help on that front.
Despite rhetoric on the lack of Liberal leadership, the Conservative government’s inconsistency on environmental issues alone may be enough to cost them the next election.
Your claim that the Canadian government seems skeptical about science is amazing for its generality and its presuppositions. Is “the Canadian government” skeptical about science, all science, science as such?
Is Nature, the magazine, science? Is anything said by one of its editors and writers somehow knowable as science? Is the particular system of opinions under discussion, about which at least some Canadian officials are skeptical, actually science? Is the nature or character of science scientifically established? Does “science” mean “truth”? What is science?
Are the officials of the Canadian government scientists? Are the writers of Law Is Cool scientists? Are the awarders of the Nobel prizes? Is Julia Langer? Are the other members of the WWF? Does a method exist by which one may infallibly distinguish scientists from others? What is a scientist?
Do all scientists hold to a single system of opinions? Do scientists ever change their minds about matters some of them previously considered settled? Have people ever claimed falsely to be scientists? How does one know? Is it ever difficult to judge? Have any scientists, real or false, ever made false claims? How does one know? Is it ever difficult to judge?
Is any scientist required to believe something another scientist says? Is any non-scientist required to believe something a scientist says? Who is permitted to doubt what? May a woman doubt? May a gay man doubt? May a Christian doubt? May a muslim?
Now, to bring the matter back down to cases, one can usefully consider these accounts and statistics for the most recently reported twelve-month period.
http://www.dailytech.com/Temperature+Monitors+Report+Worldwide+Global+Cooling/article10866.htm
If this reversal continues, we can warm ourselves with red cheeks and a bonfire of the vanities.
LawIsCool: Although it may appear counter-intuitive, global warming does not result in uniform increases in temperature globally. The causal link between recent human activity and recent changes is not contested by scientists; only the extent and eventual effects are.
I think its dangerous to suggest that science can support only one political or public policy stance on any issue, particularly when that issue is as controversial as the Kyoto Accord.
Calling Harper skeptical of science is just another attempt to paint him as a scary and extreme right-wing neo-con, which is just Liberal Party filler for those quiet moments between their many witch hunts and leadership embarrassments.
Dion’s lack of leadership is relevant, but its how Harper responds to the total failure by Liberal governments to meet the Kyoto targets that matters. Since taking office, the Conservatives have already shown more conviction and results on this file than any other government in Canadian history, and that will help him win the next election, not lose it.