![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Ike Thoughts (while the pipe lasts)
Sep. 12th, 2008 07:19 pm1. At 5 PM, with Ike closing in on Galveston, Bonnie and I chose to repair to our front porch to watch the wind come up. We brought several deck chairs, several bottles of well chilled champagne, smoked salmon and other edibles, and our emergency radio. We watched the wind whip the trees around and drop loose branches to the ground. Dog owners, recognizing that their options for dog-walking would shortly be limited, began their final loop around the block with their pets; some of the smaller ones were tossed around in the high breeze. Yet, for all the high wind and the threat of impending higher wind, rain, lightning, lost power, etc., I felt no fear.
With Bonnie I am invincible.
2. It appears that Galveston has had only about a 50% evacuation rate, leaving about 30k people on an island that may very well be entirely awash when the eye comes over. How did this happen? My opinion: blame the Republican party. Yes, I'm bringing politics into a non-sectarian natural disaster; bear with me. The Republicans invented the concept of distrusting science. Global warming? nonsense! Intelligent design? might be legit! Any kind of environmental control? Must be part of the liberal tax-and-spend agenda! The Republicans have created a culture of distrusting science -- of selling the less educated sector of the population on the notion that not only do scientists not only not know what they are talking about, but they may actually be part of a vast conspiracy to further some obscene and unknowable goals!
So when the Weather Channel just interviewed a bunch of people camped on their front porches in Galveston, and asked them why they didn't leave, they replied that they knew about the warnings of the meteorologists, but they just didn't agree that the danger was as severe as advertised. They had been through other hurricanes (which didn't directly impact the island) and they just didn't believe that the danger was as high as the scientists were warning about.
The scientific establishment has no agendas. It's composed of a group of individuals so distinct in politics and personal ideologies that it would be impossible for it to have a uniform agenda. When a massive collection of scientists tells you that you are in danger, you should believe them. If somebody has made you believe that such warnings are untrustworthy, they have done you a grave disservice, and any injuries and fatalities resulting from this disaster must be at least partially laid at the doorsteps of those responsible.
With Bonnie I am invincible.
2. It appears that Galveston has had only about a 50% evacuation rate, leaving about 30k people on an island that may very well be entirely awash when the eye comes over. How did this happen? My opinion: blame the Republican party. Yes, I'm bringing politics into a non-sectarian natural disaster; bear with me. The Republicans invented the concept of distrusting science. Global warming? nonsense! Intelligent design? might be legit! Any kind of environmental control? Must be part of the liberal tax-and-spend agenda! The Republicans have created a culture of distrusting science -- of selling the less educated sector of the population on the notion that not only do scientists not only not know what they are talking about, but they may actually be part of a vast conspiracy to further some obscene and unknowable goals!
So when the Weather Channel just interviewed a bunch of people camped on their front porches in Galveston, and asked them why they didn't leave, they replied that they knew about the warnings of the meteorologists, but they just didn't agree that the danger was as severe as advertised. They had been through other hurricanes (which didn't directly impact the island) and they just didn't believe that the danger was as high as the scientists were warning about.
The scientific establishment has no agendas. It's composed of a group of individuals so distinct in politics and personal ideologies that it would be impossible for it to have a uniform agenda. When a massive collection of scientists tells you that you are in danger, you should believe them. If somebody has made you believe that such warnings are untrustworthy, they have done you a grave disservice, and any injuries and fatalities resulting from this disaster must be at least partially laid at the doorsteps of those responsible.
