|
popeye1250 -> RE: "Night of the global warmers." (1/10/2010 2:00:12 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DarlingSavage
Hello, scientific evidence is real! Anything that gets published as scientific evidence must undergo extensive peer review. They're called peer reviewed journal articles. Furthermore, all articles must be based on tests which are repeatable. That means that I can read someone else's article, then go out and follow the same procedures that they recorded and get the same results. That's the whole idea. Do NOT dis the scientific process! It's a process that has been developed over the last several centuries with the intent of ruling out bias, misconception, and human error.
DarlingSavage, you know that and I know that.
I am not trying to "dis the scientific process." I am pointing out that the global warming goose steppers discard *any* science that doesn't agree with their preordained conclusions.
Now try explaining what you said above to the members of that cult. If you come up with one thousand studies that disagree with their...."opinions" they will summarily reject every single one of those one thousand studies! "Peer, Schmeer" they don't care. You could "repeat" them a thousand times and they will reject them a thousand times! It has nothing to do with "science" it's a cult just like the Scientologists and if you disagree with them you're a "non-believer!"
And don't try to show them why the mathematics doesn't work or they'll turn it into a "left vs right" argument.
Admittedly my degree isn't in "science" but in business. Six years ago out of pure curiosity I started reading about this subject thinking that there could be something to it. I poured through scientific journals, websites, news articles, anything I could find. Shortly into it I could see a lot of discrepancies and I also noticed that there seemed to be a "movement" involved, not of the scientists but of everyday people like me who were dead set that "man" was causing "global warming" and anything else be damned!
And it was readily apparent that these people's "positions" were not grounded in mathematics or science but solely on their uninformed *opinions.*
I had no "opinion" going in, just curiosity. One of them asked me what a "Geologist" was! And in one room when I asked their opinion about the Vostok ice core studies....silence, they didn't know what I was talking about!
As I said, I wasn't trained as a scientist, I'm more at home with accounting, finance, insurance, and economics but after reading so many studies, reports, journals etc I could see a pattern emerging. You were either a "believer" or a "non-believer" and science, mathematics or anything else that got in the way of their "theology" was out the window! And like any religion, they had their "God" in the human form of Al Gore.
Their "Peer Review" is another zombie agreeing with them not from a mathematical or scientific standpoint but simply to come to the aid of,....."a believer!"
How can someone who has *no knowledge* of the subject matter make anything even approaching a cogent argument about "science?"
To be fair there were some who seemed to have a grasp of the subject but when challenged felt "threatened" and attacked my sources and,.....me, for not "believing."
I'm thinking maybe this is a fad like being a hippie in the late 60's that will play out.
So Savage, if you'd like to have a go at them be my guest! Try telling them about "Peer Reviewed journal articles" and how it's worked so well over the last few hundred years! Oh they'll love that! "Non-believer!" "Peer review, ...DISCARDED!"
But don't expect any open minds and put on your flak jacket and helmet!
Let us know how you make out.
|
|
|
|
