Galileo and getting the job

We all know Galileo's story. Put on trial by unscientific religion, he nearly lost his life because he taught the earth orbited the sun. In other words, religion mean, science nice. Except, the story isn't true.

What's wrong in the story is that the largest supporter of science then and Galileo's biggest patron was the Catholic Church. Galileo's biggest enemies were, in fact, his rudeness and other scientist's envy of him.

So why was Galileo put on trial? He was put on trial because he couldn't prove the earth orbited the sun, yet he taught it anyway. He taught without firm scientific proof which he promised he'd never do.

Now attitudes were different, even in the Renaissance. Because the Roman Empire collapsed from the despair of numerous civil wars brought on by unclear succession, in both West and East, ( the name Byzantine Empire is an invention of history) Western Civilization saw division as it's biggest threat to survival. Thus there was a common felt need for orthodoxy; sometimes taken to cruel extremes.

Today, some scientists are playing the part of the orthodox accuser when dealing with the controversy of man-made climate change, exciting passions, using character assassination and violating the scientific method. This atmosphere can be a trap for job seekers on either side of the issue.

Now I can't tell you how to think on the topic. I can, however, suggest how to handle something which is so politically correct when applying for a job, should it come up.

To begin, pithy classroom insults like “climate change deniers,” lose them. I can guarantee you from years of experience that half the people you talk to about utilities don't believe in man-made climate change. Insults are a bad start.

Next, know why you believe what you believe. A good boss doesn't care what you think if you can back it up. They may even ask you seemingly sympathetic questions on man-made climate change to see if your knowledge is based on critical thinking. Don't assume you know the interviewer and don't assume you know the issue of man-made climate change if you have never honestly looked at it.

For example, on the con-side, the hockey stick graph of rising world temperatures is faulty. So are disappearing coast lines. When a glass of water with ice in it melts, the water volume goes down, not up. This principle is more relevant than you might think. Also, Arctic ice levels vary greatly over time. 90% of the ice is in Antarctica anyway, and it's experiencing normal melting patterns.

On the pro-side of man-made climate change, the earth's climate has warmed over the last hundred years. And despite the scandals involving man-made climate change scientists, there are reputable climatologists who believe in it. Research their findings. Finally practicable green energy, once realized, is renewable.

Seek unadulterated answers. Remember, when people talk of consensus in science as with man-made climate change, this is troubling. There's absolutely no need for consensus on the periodic table, everyone believes it.

There's now an orthodoxy where critical thinking no longer reigns when green is mentioned. This is too bad because much of what's green, like clean water, is good. Still, you don't face imprisonment or worse; in this age.

So be honest in the job application process. You'd be surprised what employers search out when hiring, and if you can back up what you believe because you really know it, you could get the job.

By

Jeffrey Ruzicka

Jeffrey Ruzicka is a retired executive of a small company that specializes in industrial water treatment. He is a contributing writer to UtilitiesJobs, UtilitiesJobsBlog and Nexxt