Superfreakonomics, global warming, and music

A contrarian chapter on global warming in Superfreakonomics has sparked intense controvery.  I am partcularly intriqued by the "shape" of the debate -- the kinds of arguments that are being used in both directions. 

I found the following paragraph, from this Bloomberg blog post, to be particularly interesting:

Dubner wonders why everyone is so angry. In part, it’s because the book’s blithe remedies – “We could end this debate and be done with it, and move on to problems that are harder to solve,” Levitt told the U.K. Guardian newspaper – are an insult to the thousands of scientists who have devoted their careers to this crisis.

Hmmm.  Let's paraphrase that paragraph as follows.

Mr. Inventor wonders why everyone is so angry. In part, it’s because his invention's blithe remedy is an insult to the thousands of people who have devoted their careers to this crisis.

People who have devoted their careers to Paradigm A can become very angry when you make a case for Paradigm B. Their anger spills over from attacks on Paradigm B (which are an intrinsic part of the scientific process) to personal attacks on those who dare to back it (which are an intrinsic part of human nature).

If JIMS Isomorphic Music System starts to gain momentum, I can reasonably expect to have such anger directed at me, for daring to challenge established music theoretical and music education orthodoxy. In a way, this would be a sign of progress. Such anger would prove that the Establishment was on the defensive, which is a big step forward for something that is currently beneath the Establishment's notice.