Marcellus #2

According to Pennlive.com this year, geologists at Penn State and the University of Wyoming released an petroleum industry-funded report on Marcellus Shale projections and economic impacts. It contained a disclaimer that none of the scientists or institutions “makes any warranty or representation, express or implied, with respect to the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of the information contained in the report."

What could this possibly mean? It means the good professors do not want an opponent of their opinion harassing their children in school or firebombing their garage. What it means is that even in academia honest debate and discussion are over. What it means is that scientific publications have become informational and nothing more. Concepts and hypotheses have become musings. And why not? What scientist in his right mind would want to put his name on a paper at Oral Roberts University that supports evolution? Does Obama's former economic advisor, Christina Romer, want to talk to the press about her concept of the tax multiplier when Obama is raising taxes? If you had a grant from NASA, would you argue with global warming?

What is happening in science is a microcosm if what is happening in the culture: Every single thing has become a singularity, a tiny individual black hole of self-righteous animosity. Everything that is done is done in isolation. Nothing has a connection to anything else. Global warming is not an interesting question or a possible problem that needs evaluated; it is a life threatening disaster of impending extinction or it is an academic scam created for the benefit of carbon credit traders. Fracking is a solution to our economic problems or a self-destructive act of mindless greed.

Amazingly in a postmodern world where nothing is felt to be clear or true, we are strangling ourselves with absolutes.