Global Warming

Last night I went to see a lecture by one of the Enron whistle-blower women, but, very confusingly, ended up at a debate on global warming instead. (Turns out the Enron whistle-blower woman is on Thursday, not Tuesday.) The two speakers both had impressive academic credentials (phDs in physics from, respectively, Stanford and Columbia), and so I was wondering how they managed to dig up an actual scientist who was going to deny global warming. It turns out they hadn’t. Both speakers heaped derision on anyone who denied global warming. It was one of those weird “debates” where the speakers agree with everything the other says. While this lack of red meat makes for a less-than-compelling debate, I guess it is representative of the “debate” among scientists about global warming.

The auditorium was packed, but only because all first year English composition students were required to attend, despite the fact that the topic has no apparent connection to English composition. When I was an undergrad, my school used similar nefarious tactics (in the guise of the “wellness” credit) to compel attendance for guest speakers. I think this a bad idea, but whatever, nobody asked me. What you end up with is an unruly mob of students who take out their displeasure on the guests by ostentatiously ignoring them — students shift in their seats, do reading for class, write papers, or carry on loud running conversations with their neighbors. It’s actually even worse nowadays, since everyone has lightweight wireless laptops. I was sitting in the back, and so looked out over a sea of glowing monitors. Everyone whose screen I could see was browsing Facebook, using Instant Messenger, or playing computer solitaire. Sometimes you could barely hear the speakers over the clatter of keyboards.