Not "Lowellization," although I like the term for what you defined. I need a term that describes the tendency for an organization to, all else being equal, take the least controversial route. This is not a conspiracy, it's human nature.
For most organizations who have little interest in being political or controversial, AGW is not a hill they care to die on. "Yes, we support the IPCC" is totally painless, and doesn't change much for them.
It's funny, but I think a lot of people treat religion this way. Go along to get along. Actual belief is almost irrelevant.
The American Association of Petroleum Geologists was originally a glaring exception to the prevailing trend, taking the view that global warming was not caused primarily by human activity.
This did not go well. No conspiracy, just a lot of general grief they didn't want or need. They have since backed off.
An atheist can't run for president in this country. Not openly. Is this a conspiracy against atheism, or just a river politicians don't want to bother to swim against? I'm sure you can think of other examples.
Flame » in reply to I'll meet you halfway.
re: I'll meet you halfway.
The whole thread (31 posts)
- You would think...
- re: It would be nice
- See...
- Faith-based science is as immovable as faith-based politics.
- re: You would think...