Climate Change

A forum to seperate the more serious discussions from the lighter topics in Off-topic.

Re: Climate Change

Postby V » 25 Sep 2019, 02:15

The O wrote:Did I just read correctly that you are a scientist and that you don't care about the source of information? How is that possible?

You do realize that anti-climate change science is 100% backed up by one particular family? Not somewhat backed up, but 100% backed up.

As a scientist, do you accept all papers, data, and sources as equal? I honestly can't believe that is correct. Did you think that smoking tobacco was not dangerous because the tobacco industry financed reports that stated that it was not cancer causing? If this is true, I have some nice property to sell you for cheap.



Lol :D
My point as a scientist is that you read the paper & pass judgement on the content, only.
If something jumps out, like selective use of data blablabla then that is a criticism of the work & as you have pointed out can happen because the author has an “agenda”.
But I’d never write off a publication of any kind solely because of the author. That’s OK in politics, but in science the work has to be read & the work criticised for what it is, not because you don’t like the source.
This may be “old-fashioned” & I grant many scientists do now behave like opinionated half baked politicians, but I came from another generation.
As a Biochemist the carcinogenic nature of tobacco smoke is more in my line of knowledge than greenhouse effects. I’ve read so much bullshit & good work on this subject over the years & never doubted smoking was a hazardous pastime, but all work was read on the basis it may have merit, irrespective of source, before passing judgement. That’s what scientists do, or at least should do.
Your feeble sarcasm doesn’t do you or your argument justice.
Platinum Classicist
Voilà! In view, a humble vaudevillian veteran cast vicariously as both victim and villain by the vicissitudes of Fate. This visage, no mere veneer of vanity, is a vestige of the vox populi, now vacant, vanished.
V
 
Posts: 622
Joined: 04 May 2014, 21:28
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1718
All-game rating: 1754
Timezone: GMT-7

Re: Climate Change

Postby beowulf7 » 26 Sep 2019, 07:40

"As a scientist" probably does not give the impression that you want to. It's like the politicians saying "as a mother" or Trump with his "as a stable genius"

I would 100% dispute that "a scientist" reads papers with total disregard to the sources. I once looked quite deeply into Astrology: there is no doubt that there is a disciplined rigour and a strong system being applied to astrological predictions. The papers you read are very convincing as long as you accept the writers premises and their self proclaimed expertise. Ditto crystal healing, homeopathy, the Loch Ness monster and Lincolnshire. All logically arguable and consistent within a false set of assumed parameters. Bunkum but disciplined bunkum. Reading any paper without seeking confirmation of source and bias is actually not scientific at all. Given that, as a scientist, I am guessing you would not accept any paper proving the hollow earth theory, then there is something at play outside the contents of the paper. You need to question to what that is.

And claiming a superior position "as a scientist" and then following it up with the emotive "feeble sarcasm" barb looks a little strange.

You don't need a white coat to have wisdom or insight - and Mengele was a scientist. I think we accept that self proclaiming "as a scientist" has little merit.
User avatar
beowulf7
 
Posts: 2431
Joined: 07 Jan 2009, 17:55
Location: Kent, UK
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (962)
All-game rating: (963)
Timezone: GMT

Re: Climate Change

Postby Strategus » 26 Sep 2019, 09:22

beowulf7 wrote:"As a scientist" probably does not give the impression that you want to. It's like the politicians saying "as a mother" or Trump with his "as a stable genius"

I would 100% dispute that "a scientist" reads papers with total disregard to the sources. I once looked quite deeply into Astrology: there is no doubt that there is a disciplined rigour and a strong system being applied to astrological predictions. The papers you read are very convincing as long as you accept the writers premises and their self proclaimed expertise. Ditto crystal healing, homeopathy, the Loch Ness monster and Lincolnshire. All logically arguable and consistent within a false set of assumed parameters. Bunkum but disciplined bunkum. Reading any paper without seeking confirmation of source and bias is actually not scientific at all. Given that, as a scientist, I am guessing you would not accept any paper proving the hollow earth theory, then there is something at play outside the contents of the paper. You need to question to what that is.

And claiming a superior position "as a scientist" and then following it up with the emotive "feeble sarcasm" barb looks a little strange.

You don't need a white coat to have wisdom or insight - and Mengele was a scientist. I think we accept that self proclaiming "as a scientist" has little merit.


You are confusing the source of the argument with the source if the data. Data can be analysed independently of who wrote it
The Devil makes work for idle forces

Better to have fought and lost, than never to have fought at all
Actual Platinum Classicist
I did WDC 2017

Just say "NO!" To carebears and kittens
User avatar
Strategus
 
Posts: 1854
Joined: 30 May 2015, 14:30
Location: England
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1583
All-game rating: 1708
Timezone: GMT

Re: Climate Change

Postby schocker » 27 Sep 2019, 16:00

And this my friends is the problem when using the scientific method when the results can not be duplicated in a lab. It is speculation to a certain degree. People question the sources, the data as to whether it is corrupted etc.....this topic has been politized and as such there are so many questions and doubts.
Member of The Classicists
schocker
Premium Member
 
Posts: 528
Joined: 12 Jun 2010, 19:05
Location: Texas
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1421
All-game rating: 1417
Timezone: GMT-6

Re: Climate Change

Postby V » 27 Sep 2019, 17:15

schocker wrote:And this my friends is the problem when using the scientific method when the results can not be duplicated in a lab. It is speculation to a certain degree. People question the sources, the data as to whether it is corrupted etc.....this topic has been politized and as such there are so many questions and doubts.


Best post of the entire thread :D
Platinum Classicist
Voilà! In view, a humble vaudevillian veteran cast vicariously as both victim and villain by the vicissitudes of Fate. This visage, no mere veneer of vanity, is a vestige of the vox populi, now vacant, vanished.
V
 
Posts: 622
Joined: 04 May 2014, 21:28
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1718
All-game rating: 1754
Timezone: GMT-7

Re: Climate Change

Postby beowulf7 » 28 Sep 2019, 11:26

Data can be analysed independently of who wrote it


Only if you can 100% the data and the way it is presented - otherwise you allow the writers bias (and selection of which material to leave out) to take over. Eric Von Daniken
User avatar
beowulf7
 
Posts: 2431
Joined: 07 Jan 2009, 17:55
Location: Kent, UK
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (962)
All-game rating: (963)
Timezone: GMT

Re: Climate Change

Postby Strategus » 28 Sep 2019, 14:36

beowulf7 wrote:
Data can be analysed independently of who wrote it


Only if you can 100% the data and the way it is presented - otherwise you allow the writers bias (and selection of which material to leave out) to take over. Eric Von Daniken

That's fair comment. So it is up to the presenter to prove what is said (or at least provide some sort of confidence e.g. Trusted sources), or it is just rhetoric.
The Devil makes work for idle forces

Better to have fought and lost, than never to have fought at all
Actual Platinum Classicist
I did WDC 2017

Just say "NO!" To carebears and kittens
User avatar
Strategus
 
Posts: 1854
Joined: 30 May 2015, 14:30
Location: England
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1583
All-game rating: 1708
Timezone: GMT

Re: Climate Change

Postby schocker » 29 Sep 2019, 00:18

And to add to that....their predictions (climate scientists) have pitifully missed their predicted target for the last 30 years.
Member of The Classicists
schocker
Premium Member
 
Posts: 528
Joined: 12 Jun 2010, 19:05
Location: Texas
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1421
All-game rating: 1417
Timezone: GMT-6

Previous

Return to Debates

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests