Dissent Besmirched

The Volokh Conspiracy encapsulates the outrage! over the possibility AEI offered money to scientists to challenge global warming. A brief excerpt from Senators to AEI, expressing that outrage:

The truth is that this scandalous behavior on the part of AEI is just the latest example of how big money interests distort and undermine honest debate on the important issues facing our country in so many areas.

If $10,000 buys so much distortion and undermining, what do you suppose $4 billion buys?

AEI President Chris DeMuth, who noted that the charge was false to begin with, makes a disturbing revelation about the state of dissent:

I believe you have overstated the scientific consensus on the subject, but, even if you have not, I find it worrisome that four powerful political leaders would object to scientific dissent per se. Although you later give a formulaic nod to the right of dissent, you object to being paid a “significant” sum for dissenting research, which rather limits your conception of permissible dissent.

Consensus--and freedom to challenge consensus--are equally vital to the progress of science. History, including recent history, is replete with examples of expert consensus that turned out in the fullness of time to be mistaken.

The letter is addressed to Senators Leahy, Sanders, Feinstein, and Kerry. Via Tim Blair, Kerry himself has, when it served his needs, championed dissent:

The lesson is that true patriots must defend the right of dissent, and hear the voices of dissenters...The patriotic obligation to speak out becomes even more urgent when politicians refuse to debate their policies or disclose the facts.

Of course, all dissent is not created equal. Some disagrees with Senator Kerry.

If we lived in a different time, I get the feeling the Medieval Warming Period Denialists^TM would have been quite comfortable having people jailed for challenging the consensus that the earth is flat.

UPDATE: Yet another scientist engages in unsavory dissent:

...Dr. Shaviv not only believes there are credible "other suspects," he believes that at least one provides a superior explanation for the 20th century's warming.

"Solar activity can explain a large part of the 20th-century global warming," he states, particularly because of the evidence that has been accumulating over the past decade of the strong relationship that cosmic- ray flux has on our atmosphere. So much evidence has by now been amassed, in fact, that "it is unlikely that [the solar climate link] does not exist."

Dangerous speech like this caused the Holocaust, you know.