Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Environment

Environment Environmental Politics Forum - Environmental issues, global warming, pollution, and proposals


Thanks Tree33Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old March 28th, 2014, 10:49 AM   #1
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: LA LA Land North
Posts: 26,284
More Data on AGW Believers


2014 - Salon.com

This adds to the previous work for 1991 - 2012.
Quote:
The articles have a total of 33,690 individual authors. The 24 rejecting papers have a total of 34 authors, about 1 in 1,000.


The Pie-Chart
RNG is offline  
Old March 28th, 2014, 11:17 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 55,513
Yep, and that tiny minority is well-financed and given undue publicity eagerly eaten up by self-imagined Davids.
imaginethat is online now  
Old March 28th, 2014, 11:45 AM   #3
Banned
 
excalibur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: The Milky Way
Posts: 24,581
Haven't I read, repeatedly on DTT, that scientists have been wrong very often in the past? And famously wrong too, so I've been told.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Michael Crichton on consensus science

Editor: This is a good response to someone who says, “But all those scientists can’t be wrong!” Crichton was referring to science in general .......

“I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you’re being had.

“Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.

“There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period.”

[Crichton gave a number of examples where the scientific consensus was completely wrong for many years.]

“… Finally, I would remind you to notice where the claim of consensus is invoked. Consensus is invoked only in situations where the science is not solid enough. Nobody says the consensus of scientists agrees that E = mc². Nobody says the consensus is that the sun is 93 million miles away. It would never occur to anyone to speak that way.”

Source: Crichton, Michael, Aliens cause Global Warming, 17 January 2003 speech at the California Institute of Technology (Aliens Cause Global Warming: A Caltech Lecture by Michael Crichton or 'Aliens Cause Global Warming' - WSJ.com or http://stephenschneider.stanford.edu...ichton2003.pdf)




excalibur is offline  
Old March 28th, 2014, 12:03 PM   #4
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: LA LA Land North
Posts: 26,284
Quote:
Originally Posted by excalibur View Post
Haven't I read, repeatedly on DTT, that scientists have been wrong very often in the past? And famously wrong too, so I've been told.
I guess I don't take someone who's list of accomplishments according to Wikipedia is
Quote:
Author, film producer, film director, screenwriter, television producer
too seriously on questions of science.

Although I did enjoy Jurassic Park.
Thanks from imaginethat
RNG is offline  
Old March 28th, 2014, 12:12 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Nwolfe35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Virginia Beach, VA
Posts: 14,725
Quote:
Originally Posted by excalibur View Post
Haven't I read, repeatedly on DTT, that scientists have been wrong very often in the past? And famously wrong too, so I've been told.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Michael Crichton on consensus science

Editor: This is a good response to someone who says, “But all those scientists can’t be wrong!” Crichton was referring to science in general .......

“I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you’re being had.

“Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.

“There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period.”

[Crichton gave a number of examples where the scientific consensus was completely wrong for many years.]

“… Finally, I would remind you to notice where the claim of consensus is invoked. Consensus is invoked only in situations where the science is not solid enough. Nobody says the consensus of scientists agrees that E = mc². Nobody says the consensus is that the sun is 93 million miles away. It would never occur to anyone to speak that way.”

Source: Crichton, Michael, Aliens cause Global Warming, 17 January 2003 speech at the California Institute of Technology (Aliens Cause Global Warming: A Caltech Lecture by Michael Crichton or 'Aliens Cause Global Warming' - WSJ.com or http://stephenschneider.stanford.edu...ichton2003.pdf)




Consensus isn't science.

However when a majority of scientists agree on something then that means the data we currently have points in that direction.

If new data is found that disagrees with the generally held hypothesis...then scientists will take a look at it.

This differs from religion where when new data disagrees with the generally held belief it is either ignored or there are attempts to explain it away.
Thanks from waitingtables and imaginethat
Nwolfe35 is online now  
Old March 28th, 2014, 12:33 PM   #6
Banned
 
excalibur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: The Milky Way
Posts: 24,581
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
I guess I don't take someone who's list of accomplishments according to Wikipedia is....... Author, film producer, film director, screenwriter, television producer

And we should take you seriously when you impugn the man?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++

About Dr Michael Crichton ( 1942–2008 ):

Educated at Harvard University A.B. (summa cum laude) 1964 (Phi Beta Kappa).

Henry Russell Shaw Travelling Fellow, 1964–65.

Visiting Lecturer in Anthropology at Cambridge University, England, 1965.

Graduated Harvard Medical School, M.D. 1969; post-doctoral fellow at the Salk Institute for Biological Sciences, La Jolla, California 1969–1970.

Source: michaelcrichton.com/aboutmichaelcrichton-biography.html.




Last edited by excalibur; March 28th, 2014 at 12:37 PM.
excalibur is offline  
Old March 28th, 2014, 12:38 PM   #7
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: LA LA Land North
Posts: 26,284
Quote:
Originally Posted by excalibur View Post
And we should take you seriously?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++

About Dr Michael Crichton ( 1942–2008 ):

Educated at Harvard University A.B. (summa cum laude) 1964 (Phi Beta Kappa).

Henry Russell Shaw Travelling Fellow, 1964–65.

Visiting Lecturer in Anthropology at Cambridge University, England, 1965.

Graduated Harvard Medical School, M.D. 1969; post-doctoral fellow at the Salk Institute for Biological Sciences, La Jolla, California 1969–1970.

Source: michaelcrichton.com/aboutmichaelcrichton-biography.html.
You really don't see the difference, do you? And to complete the picture, his BS is is biological anthropology. What a climatologist he is. NOT
Thanks from waitingtables and imaginethat
RNG is offline  
Old March 28th, 2014, 12:53 PM   #8
Banned
 
excalibur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: The Milky Way
Posts: 24,581
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
You really don't see the difference, do you? And to complete the picture, his BS is is biological anthropology. What a climatologist he is. NOT

That isn't what you originally posted however with your quote from Wiki (did Wiki really miss his scientific background?) when you posted Author, film producer, film director, screenwriter, television producer. A clear attempt to impugn the man.

His science expertise was quite large, he was a medical Doctor as well, and a fellow at one of the most prestigious centers in the world.

Further, his remarks dealt with consensus in any science, no statement was made that he made only in regards 'climatology'. Don't worry, the taxpayers $$$$$$ will keep flowing to the liars for a few more years to the AGW fraudsters, so relax.



excalibur is offline  
Old March 28th, 2014, 01:13 PM   #9
Banned
 
excalibur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: The Milky Way
Posts: 24,581
What price peer review.

Interesting read. Of course this wouldn't happen in climatology, now would it? Nah, there's only billions at stake each year in government grants. Yeah, right.

21st Century Gives Birth to "Open Access Journals"




Last edited by excalibur; March 28th, 2014 at 01:16 PM.
excalibur is offline  
Old March 28th, 2014, 01:16 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Gamma Solaris
Posts: 22,888
"More data on AGW Believers"...

How about more data on the whole warming issue??????
Tony is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Environment

Tags
agw, believers, data



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Judge orders Google to turn over data to FBI warrantless demands for customer data. intangible child Current Events 28 November 9th, 2013 10:40 AM
Interesting data. RNG Americas 0 October 26th, 2013 09:38 AM
Global warming believers are feeling the heat Uncle Han Current Events 17 September 27th, 2013 04:14 AM
More Weather Data Tampering? excalibur Current Events 0 September 5th, 2013 01:44 PM
Pretty powerful stuff. Something for both believers and non-believers to think about. Dude111 Philosophy 5 September 25th, 2011 07:55 AM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.