SD State Legislature on Global Warming

I was quite ready to take issue with Badlands Blue and the Madville Times on HCR 1009. I am doubtful that global warming or the teaching of such in our state High Schools are topics that call for a resolution. After a brief read, I thought that most of the resolution was basically on target.

However, while I certainly do not endorse my blogosphere colleagues' snide remarks about our legislators, they were right to make fun of one part of the resolution. The problem is this passage:

That there are a variety of climatological, meteorological, astrological, thermological, cosmological, and ecological dynamics that can effect world weather phenomena and that the significance and interrelativity of these factors is largely speculative

This is basically correct, except for a couple of words. "Astrological"? This word refers to astrology. Does it affect global climate when the moon is in Virgo, and anyone who is a Gemini need beware? Probably the right word would be "astronomical".

What about "Thermology"? That, I gather, refers to the infrared imaging of the human body. I have heard it said that whenever Al Gore shows up to give a speech on global warming, the local temperatures plunge by ten or twenty degrees and it snows. Could he really exercise such a cooling effect? Until some study confirms it, thermology probably doesn't belong in this bill.

Also, I don't think "interrelativity" is a real word or a useful coinage. Perhaps "interrelationship" might have been better.

Climate change alarmism is in a crisis right now, for good reason. Cap and Trade legislation, a very costly proposal based on very dubious quazi-scientific ideas, is something the State of South Dakota ought to be concerned about. It is easy to make mistakes when putting a resolution together, but if we are going to weigh in on this we need to be rather more careful in our choice of words.

Comments

[anon]

But the quality of the thinking that generated the "astrological" palaver is the same as that which claims we should not worry our little heads over climate change.
The scientific data cannot be wished away. And science is a suitable subject for the classroom.

[KB]

Anon: anyone can make mistakes with a couple of words, regardless of the quality of one's thinking. Scientific data can in fact be wished away, provided one is prepared to manipulate it to show what it does not in fact show. That is what climate scientists have done. One can also hide the data, refuse to release it to examination by other scientists. When that isn't enough, one can make bold claims about glaciers disappearing and sea levels rising which are based on no data at all.

[Stace Nelson]

Spot on and well said. A very apt reminder that our American English has the capacity to be appropriately precise and that such dictum should employ such verbiage of specificity. If so fortunate as to warrant such accountability, I am praying that my time and effort will be rewarded with exact prose.

[Mark Anderson]

I'm very glad you are in support of politicians deciding what should be taught in Science classes. It's much to important an issue to let scientists decide.