Not Everyone Accepts the Findings of Modern Science … And That's OK … But Do They Have To Make the Laws That Guide Our Lives?

Here’s the latest project of a civil servant, Dana Rohrabacher, pictured here, whose education includes degrees in history and American studies.  His life’s work at this point is his commitment to proving that global climate change is a fraud, i.e., that the tens of thousands of scientists, virtually all of whom concur with the theory and the physics behind it, have conspired to suck down tax-payers’ money and, what’s more, are hell-bent on creating a one-world government.

No, Rohrabacher’s not a deputy sheriff of some cow town in Oklahoma; he’s one of our 435 U.S. Representatives. 

I can understand that politics is about attracting attention, and he’s certainly done that; after all, I’m writing about him this very second (though I’m a bit ashamed of myself).  What I cannot understand is that  people with no training in science expect to be regarded seriously by attacking a large community of professional chemists, physicists, and climatologists who have spent their entire lives studying this specific subject in a rigorous, disciplined, peer-reviewed environment.

Obviously Rohrabacher has no shame.  This, of course, is not news; we’ve probably come to expect that of our elected leaders; maybe Anthony Wiener has demonstrated that to those of us who may have previously sat on the fence.   But my question isn’t “Who are they?” but rather “Who are we?”  We elected this guy (just last year, btw) to make our laws?  Not good.