|
Post by sigurdur on Dec 30, 2012 18:14:54 GMT
|
|
zaphod
Level 3 Rank
Posts: 210
|
Post by zaphod on Dec 30, 2012 20:09:14 GMT
Interesting. With this kind of thing going on, how is a reasonable person of moderate intelligence and education but no specialist knowledge in the climate field (such as myself lol!) to draw conclusions? Are the public to accept without questions anything the government favourites tell us? I guess so. Something else that bothered me until I realised was that I had mentally associated "climate change" with "wholly man made". If someone inquisitive and rather non-conformist like me can be so taken in by the manmade global warming lobby, what hope is there?
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Dec 30, 2012 20:18:53 GMT
Interesting. With this kind of thing going on, how is a reasonable person of moderate intelligence and education but no specialist knowledge in the climate field (such as myself lol!) to draw conclusions? Are the public to accept without questions anything the government favourites tell us? I guess so. Something else that bothered me until I realised was that I had mentally associated "climate change" with "wholly man made". If someone inquisitive and rather non-conformist like me can be so taken in by the manmade global warming lobby, what hope is there? mentally associated climate change with wholly man made That is the intention.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Dec 30, 2012 20:23:05 GMT
Interesting. With this kind of thing going on, how is a reasonable person of moderate intelligence and education but no specialist knowledge in the climate field (such as myself lol!) to draw conclusions? Are the public to accept without questions anything the government favourites tell us? I guess so. Something else that bothered me until I realised was that I had mentally associated "climate change" with "wholly man made". If someone inquisitive and rather non-conformist like me can be so taken in by the manmade global warming lobby, what hope is there? Zaphod: The hope is that you may have been taken in, but your survival instinct kicked in and you realized the error of your thinking. Skeptical Science Syndrome is a very real sickness. Reality is the cure.
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Feb 5, 2013 23:32:10 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Feb 6, 2013 3:43:40 GMT
magellan: You got it. One sided......postulation.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 3, 2013 5:09:16 GMT
|
|
|
Post by steve on Mar 3, 2013 11:15:22 GMT
Was reading at WUWT and this quote is priceless. "Patience with mental illness will often resort to ‘projection’ in order to survive in their own version of reality. Projection is the practice of accusing someone else of an issue that you have, perhaps in an attempt to divert the deserved criticism. I am not saying that warmists suffer from mental illness, but they have used a form of ‘projection’ when labeling CAGW skeptics as climate change deniers. Of course, most skeptics have never denied climate change, only the magnitude of the proposed human impact on the ever-changing climate. But warmists MUST deny all significant climate change before the 20th Century in order to hold their current beliefs. That is a huge denial of climate change; several orders of magnitude greater than the denial of which skeptics are falsely accused." Warmists do not deny all significant climate change from before the 20th Century. That's just a stupid statement because the ice age cycles of the last 3 million years, the longer warmer periods that sustained megafauna, and the instances of rapid change such as the Younger Dryas or the Dansgaard-Oeschler events are all part of the scientific record. What the author of your quote is upset about is failure to accept his belief in: Well ignoring the word "periodically" in the first sentence and adding "as well as CO2" to the last sentence, I don't think climate scientists have a problem with the statement. A common "Skeptic syndrome" is to build a strawman - to invent an argument that noone has ever made and then proceed to demolish it. This is a classic example. The main part of the article that the comment was written against is all about demanding that scientists include the impact of moonbeams on climate even though moonbeams have not been detected and noone has postulated a reasonable explanation as to how they would affect climate. Bonkers!
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Mar 3, 2013 16:29:38 GMT
Steve
The day you acknowledge all the lying and cheating that has been going on to promote the idea humans are definately responsible for alarming climate change will be the day i take you seriously again
Fairly obviously we have been bombarded in recent years about the alarming rate of melting of Greenlands glaciers, and so forth etc etc.
If we were to believe some of the people you support by saying nothing against them we would be looking at some kind of catastrophe.
Instead we know these people lied to further an environmental agenda because they told us on TV that they lied to promote an environmental agenda.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 3, 2013 17:02:23 GMT
Radiant: SS is a political site. Anyone who has read a lot of the scientific literature knows that the validity of SS as a source of valid information is not useful.
Mr. Cook, knowing this, was only being honest in having his site taken out of the mix of scientific sites. It did not get enough votes to be part of the political sites in the running, and to be included as a scientific site was a travesty.
|
|
|
Post by steve on Mar 3, 2013 17:05:06 GMT
Radiant, So have you read every one of the 3474 posts I've posted here then? If you would like to identify a specific piece of lying and cheating then I'm sure I can satisfy you. But make sure it involves lying and cheating, otherwise it could get a bit boring. Disclaimer - I don't use skepticalscience for anything other than lists of papers covering a certain subject because the one or two summaries strike me as a little too certain:- much the same could be said of co2"science". However, their escalator is an excellent debunking of many sceptic claims that are based on short term cooling events.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 3, 2013 17:32:59 GMT
Steve: Please......you are TOO smart to post that escalator. From a statistical point of view it is worthless. You do understand what I just typed I would hope? ??
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 3, 2013 17:34:46 GMT
Steve: I very much enjoy your posts here because you do post from the literature, or at least based on the literature.
To post that graph tho....offffffta.
But we can all have weak moments.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 3, 2013 17:37:33 GMT
Steve:
OK.....I have to give you a break. I also post items of dubious value once in awhile, and the reason I do so is to stimulate thinking and hope others help in validating or debunking what I post.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 3, 2013 18:47:25 GMT
|
|