Suppressing debate never a good idea
Legislators who promoted the California Climate Science Truth and Accountability Act (Free Press editorial page, June 6) do not seem to understand that truth is not possible in science. Scientific hypotheses, even scientific theories, are not knowledge. They are educated opinions based on interpretations of observations and so can be, and often are, wrong.
This United Nations encourages this misunderstanding, often labeling its climate science conclusions unequivocal; in other words, statements that cannot be wrong. As evidence for this position, they present empirical data. But all philosophers since ancient times have understood observations are particular, contingent and probable, so cannot be used to prove truth.
Traditionally, liberals have supported skepticism and relativism. But this approach has been turned upside down in the climate debate. While many conservatives encourage debate about climate change, most of the Left consider this unacceptable. Like an excerpt out of George Orwell’s novel “1984,” sponsors of California’s “science truth” legislation wanted skepticism about climate change causes made into a criminal offense.
History demonstrates it is far easier to lose freedom of speech than, once lost, to reacquire it. Everyone must object loudly when elected officials attempt to suppress debate about anything, especially the rapidly evolving field of climate change.