Climate Science Stuff

What does it say about the strength of your argument

…when you have to dramatically fudge the data to support it?

Worth reading the ‘Comments’ section under that third article.

5 replies on “What does it say about the strength of your argument”

My scientist is more credible than your scientist 🙂 That is what I got out of the comments. But I could be wrong of course…..

I’ve never heard of Beck nor do I intend on reading up on him…or those opposed to his views.

Not immediately relevant to the linked articles, but I think there’s a sufficient lack of science education that most people don’t possess the tools to adequately assess scientific debate. I’m no climatologist (nor a paleo-climatologist), but I can read a scientific argument and know whether the arguments are sound, although some of the technical issues may elude me. It’s important to understand the nature of a scientific argument (and the fora in which the debate takes place) and understand what’s going on.

Most people, it seems, are either unable or unwilling to do this and instead subscribe to the argument that supports what they already think. I’ve seen this on both sides of the climate change debate.

I dunno, Lorne, have a close look at that second graph (the wavy sine wave shaped one). His whole point there is to claim that the current warming is part of a regular, predictable and natural trend that happens across history. But if you look closely at the bottom axis of the graph you’ll see that he (a) skipped a few centuries and (b) changed the scale halfway through. Doesn’t take any special training to realise that *that* is not just a disagreement among experts, it’s plain fraud and dishonesty.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.