IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New I had a conversation with a relative about it this past weekend
The limited infusion of non-orthodoxy into the media sphere he inhabits is very difficult to overcome. Some comments:

"I lived through the 70s... everyone was talking about how it was going to get super cold back then and they were wrong about that too."

"What about all of the falsified data??"

"China and India aren't doing anything! Why should we shoulder all of the burden?"

and so on... :-/
Regards,
-scott
Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
New Yeah, I knew a guy back in the late 60s . . .
. . who was going around preaching about the coming ice age he read about in a book. There's lots of folks like this - I call them "One Book Wonders". They read one book, believe in it, and ignore all other input.

Sounds a lot like Christians, but the difference is, they haven't even read their book.
New In this case the story was all over the media
... but the actual numbers of scientific papers told the opposite story.
Regards,
-scott
Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
New Sullen LRPD: That's not fair! I'm just a transparent rhetorical device!
New Incidentally, my Liege, this is how we know the world to be banana-shaped.
--

Drew
New It's true that ice ages came in cycles.
Trouble is, even if there's a natural cycle, that doesn't mean it will continue when forcings are changed.

One can be skeptical of reports in the press about scientific findings - skepticism is good! But it really needs to be tempered with a bit of humility.

We (most of us anyway) wouldn't think that we were experts at brain surgery or metallurgy or constructing massively distributed data centers from watching a few YouTube videos or reading a few blogs. We (most of us anyway) appreciate that it takes years of study and years of actually doing the hands-on work in the field to become an expert. J Random Blogger will almost never have that background and experience.

Writing a good scientific paper is a painful exercise, especially in a field that is a lightning rod. The scientists work hard to get every detail right. The coauthors can argue over every word in the text. It's such a painful process that they don't want it to get held up in peer-review by demanded changes, or even worse, to have it rejected - they want it to be as perfect as possible. It can take years even in a relatively uncontroversial field. (Sure, there are people and groups that can crank out papers like an assembly line, but if they're good it's only because they've built up a demonstrated track record of getting it right. And even then it usually takes months of work.) . It's not just a Buddy System where everyone lets their friends' papers through with a wink and a nod and trash papers from people who aren't in The Club. The credibility of the reviewers is on the line, too.

Yet, somehow, when it comes to scientific topics that have powerful entrenched economic interests ("health supplements", pollution, climate change, health care, etc.) the actual experts are suspect. Curious. :-/

SkepticalScience is a great resource for people who have a genuine curiosity about the science of CO2 and climate change (as you probably know).

Yes, there has been fraud in science. But we know what fraud looks like and how to detect it. The only thing more exciting to a scientist than finding a new phenomena is finding that previously accepted theories are wrong - the siren's call of - "this is new!" is very, very strong. But it hasn't happened with CO2 and climate change - the scientific consensus holds.

As a6l6e6x reminds us, there's always been that undercurrent in the USA. But the knownothings have far too much power now.

Keep fighting the good fight.

Cheers,
Scott.
New you sure?
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman
New There are indeed too many "open access" journals.
Lots of them are scams.

Most of them are treated as a scourge by people I interact with.

Most reputable scientific publishing isn't like that.

Cheers,
Scott.
     "I'm a climate scientist. And I'm not letting trickle-down ignorance win." - (Ashton) - (9)
         There's the new motto of the Republican party - (drook)
         I had a conversation with a relative about it this past weekend - (malraux) - (7)
             Yeah, I knew a guy back in the late 60s . . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (6)
                 In this case the story was all over the media - (malraux) - (5)
                     Sullen LRPD: That's not fair! I'm just a transparent rhetorical device! -NT - (Ashton) - (1)
                         Incidentally, my Liege, this is how we know the world to be banana-shaped. -NT - (drook)
                     It's true that ice ages came in cycles. - (Another Scott) - (2)
                         you sure? - (boxley) - (1)
                             There are indeed too many "open access" journals. - (Another Scott)

Check out Elimidate.. but not right after a meal, OK?
115 ms