The Need for Non-Concensus Voices in Climate Science

Discussion in 'Environment' started by IanC, Sep 2, 2010.

  1. IanC
    Offline

    IanC Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    9,200
    Thanks Received:
    1,071
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,448
    As a newcomer to the AGW wars I have found it very confusing that the pro AGW side always seems to fall back on the excuse that anyone that disagrees should be ignored because of 'consensus' and lack of 'peer review'. I have always thought that ideas should stand on their own merits, open to debate.

    While bouncing around from one site to another I have seen many instances of 'settled science' that haven't passed the sniff test. From massive weightings given to anomalous tree rings, to grafting of one type of data to a different type, to correlation equals causation problems, to publication bias, to unrepeatable methodologies, etc....

    here are two links that show how non-peer reviewed and non-climate scientists can and do help the understanding of climate change

    DailyTech - New Scandal Erupts over NOAA Climate Data

    DailyTech - Blogger Finds Y2K Bug in NASA Climate Data

    Climate science is too insulated. They could especially use more input from the statistical scientists.
     
    Last edited: Sep 2, 2010
  2. westwall
    Offline

    westwall USMB Mod Staff Member Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2010
    Messages:
    41,004
    Thanks Received:
    7,984
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    Nevada
    Ratings:
    +19,760
    IanC,

    I am beginning to think of climatology as the modern version of eugenics. They look the same and more importantly they smell the same....bad.
     
  3. IanC
    Offline

    IanC Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    9,200
    Thanks Received:
    1,071
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,448
    not eugenics, equalitarianism. the default position is that everyone should be the same except that there is some evil human interference (racism) that is causing disparate outcomes. as with global warming and CO2, racism is a legitimate factor but only a fraction of the overall reasons for the unwelcome differences.
     

Share This Page