tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2197051945822486684.post3201118515523734780..comments2024-03-28T09:26:25.931+11:00Comments on Thinking Out Aloud: The tragic dangers of a new scienceLorenzohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00305933404442191098noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2197051945822486684.post-44632445101401453762010-09-11T10:23:32.186+10:002010-09-11T10:23:32.186+10:00You seemed to be getting very worked up by claims ...You seemed to be getting very worked up by claims I did not make. You may notice I did not claim there was a scientific consensus on global cooling in the 1970s: on the contrary, I started by accepting that and linking to a paper which set out that very point. That Hansen and Schneider were, however, both involved in the global cooling scare is a matter of historical fact.<br /><br />Creationism has no scientific credibility, and Intelligent Design hardly much more. (Though it is sociologically interesting that creationism should seek to garner the authority of science in such a way.) There is rather more scientific dissent on the point of <i>catastrophic</i> anthropogenic global warming.<br /><br />It strikes me as clear that we are in a warming phase and likely that there is some human element in that. Beyond that is much less well established. (Which would put my reaction to climate science about the same as turned out to be appropriate for economics and genetics.) The appropriate policy response is murkier still. There is a lot of premature certainty around. Premature certainty which handled persuading doubts badly (because they were dismissed so absolutely and so early) and has now created rods for their own back.<br /><br />The historical parallels with laissez faire economics and eugenics is obvious. Including the avid, even frantic, claims of moral authority.Lorenzohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00305933404442191098noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2197051945822486684.post-487816407762400852010-09-10T20:55:25.907+10:002010-09-10T20:55:25.907+10:00Full disclosure: I accept what NASA and global sci...Full disclosure: I accept what NASA and global scientific community is telling us.<br /><br />....................<br /><br /><i>A recent paper establishing that there was no scientific consensus behind the “global cooling” scare of the 1970s</i><br /><br />So you accept that this particular zombie PRATT point is officially dead and buried, right?<br />Or do you want to revive it and set it walking again?<br />Climate denier PRATT's exist.<br />They haunt the internet.<br />Endlessly.<br /><a href="http://www.skepticalscience.com/" rel="nofollow">(Link)</a><br />Remind you of anything?<br /><a href="http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/" rel="nofollow">(Link)</a><br /><br /><br />They come up again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again again and again and again and again and again and and again ad nauseum....<br /><br />(And every time, climate deniers claim that they are being ignored by mainstream science!)<br /><br />Are you, in your own opinion, convinced that the "scientific consensus believed in a coming Ice Age in the 70's" PRATT is rubbish?<br /><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XB3S0fnOr0M" rel="nofollow">(Link)</a>Cedric Katesbyhttp://www.randi.orgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2197051945822486684.post-85915221154245759902010-03-10T21:05:26.500+11:002010-03-10T21:05:26.500+11:00It is absolutely fine for people to comment on old...It is absolutely fine for people to comment on old posts: especially as I have changed my blog I can now spot they have done so.<br /><br />Yes, the reaction is very much one of denial, bordering at times on hysteria. Shouting louder will not "fix" the problems, but they seem to think it will. Dealing with the capacity for "their side" to be seriously wrong, and that "the enemy" have at least some good points which need to be dealt with, appears to be too much for their worldview to cope with.<br /><br />On the potential effects, that works both ways, since the catastrophists think that "deniers" are being blase about looming human misery and disaster. If the full agenda of carbon control was implemented, the effects for the poor would be grim, but that seems most unlikely to happen. Though the effect of "biofuels" on world food prices are already pretty bad.Lorenzohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00305933404442191098noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2197051945822486684.post-76439576572361315812010-03-10T12:11:12.469+11:002010-03-10T12:11:12.469+11:00Hi. I hope you don't find it disagreeable when...Hi. I hope you don't find it disagreeable when people comment on older posts. I just discovered your site a week ago and have read maybe half of it...<br /><br />Anyway, regarding the topic of this post, it seems to me that the climate-apocalypse promoters are only getting more and more hysterical in light of the recent revelations. There doesn't seem to have been much response to "climate gate" from prominent media outlets, the educational establishment, or goverment regulatory authorities. It is as if they are all trying to pretend the issue just doesn't exist. <br /><br />Do you think they realize that the economic dislocations they are advocating will literally mean death for millions of people in marginal economies (i.e., the "third world")? Isn't it fairly clearly established that impairments to first world economic activity have totally catastrophic effects on people in poorer countries? Or am I overestimating the extent to which that is empirically demonstrable? I'm no economist, so I could be a little misguided here. <br /><br />I just find it hard to believe that the proponents of the climate "religion" are really so depraved that they can blithely advocate mass starvation in the third world on account of mere aesthetic preferences. Perhaps someone needs to find a way to better inform the public about the likely impact of "greening" our economies - maybe a small dent in the standard of living in the West, but untold suffering and misery in many other places.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com