After the alarmists have politicized the science in a way that would make even Trofim Denisovich Lysenko blush, some are arguing that the best way for them to deal with those that have doubts about the credibility of AGW science is to just refuse to discuss it with them in public forums.
See: How Best to Debate Climate Deniers on TV? Simple: Don't.
The solution to the climate debate crisis is simple.
Since the Peer Review process is no longer credible, open source the data. If the data can stand on its own, it will stand. If it can't, it won't.
The email leak from the CRU proved that the much of the data and the whole of the Peer Review process must be reexamined and reformed.
No more secret data.
No more secret software.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
2 comments:
By submitting your comments, you agree that you alone are responsible for their content. I reserve the right to remove comments I deem offensive or inappropriate, at my discretion.
Threatening, abusive and illegal comments may be reported to the proper authorities. Don't be stupid. If the CIA, FBI or the Secret Service knocks on my door and asks questions about you, I will rat you out in seconds. (Sooner if I call them about you.)
Comments made below will be subject to public viewing.
Comments are subject to moderation.
It is an unfortunate fact of life that there are people out there in the wilds of the Internet that think it cute to post racist and Nazi garbage on other peoples websites. Some of these thugs are even enabled by people who should know better. In my opinion, both the thugs and their enablers are worse than spammers.
I have recently made enemies with a particular group of these people who have done just that on another website. I don't intend to make it easy for them to do that to me.
In light of that, comment moderation will be used here on this humble and very obscure little blog.
I will check in several times each day to approve appropriate comments.
For the most part, I will allow just about any type of comment except for spam and Kilgorian excrement.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hi Syrah! This is realwest! Great post.
ReplyDeleteYou said, at the end:
"No more secret data.
No more secret software"
How about we call for more SCIENCE - as in political unbiased studies about AGW? The CRU (and others who have defended the lies not only in the CRU e-mails, but in the computer codes which were also "leaked") damaged SCIENCE enormously by exposing the fact that some scientists reach their conclusion first, based on whatever they "feel" and then do research to back it up; then - if they get peer reviewed at all - make sure they get peer reviewed by folks who "feel" the same way they do.
Honestly the CRU situation with the e-mails and computer codes leaves no doubt in my mind at all that the CRU reached the conclusions they wanted to and squelched any true dissent. That's not Science, that's politics. And worse yet the CRU has damaged the entire scientific field - no one really knows who to believe in scientific studies anymore.
Hey President Obama, how about we insist on true TRANSPARENCY on ANY scientific studies we pay for or use as a basis for U.S. policy?
Don't debate at all? Well, that's one way of dodging bullets OK, but a BETTER WAY is to do your scientific research as meticulously as possible and then let it be generally peer reviewed?
Hi RW,
ReplyDelete“Is climate change bad?”
It's a silly question, as silly as “Is the sunrise bad?”
Climate change is natural to the earth. It is in fact natural to any planetary body.
The AGW alarmist need climate change to be perceived as being “bad.” They need climate change to be perceived as being so bad that we would accept the imposition of a totalitarian dictatorship that would have a say in every aspect of our lives.
Yet we know that the earth's climate is not a static system. Moreover, it can't be made static.
Only the delusional would think the earth's climate could be made static and only the mad would try to make the earth's climate static.
What they are asking us to believe is more religion then it is science.
I do not believe in their god.
I will not bend my knee to their god.