Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion Climate Change Forum Put up or shut up on global warming

Where ever you stand on global warming you just got to love it when someone goes after the Hollywood left.

Put up or shut up on global warming

Dingell puts a fair price tag on the high cost of saving energy

The Detroit News



Link

While this is interesting, how is this science?

JMR: "While this is interesting, how is this science?"

Good observation, but then there would be some science involved in getting the smug warriors into the cracker boxes, no?

But seriously (and without reference to scpg02 and JMR) I'll take the opportunity for a quick rant, which I do enjoy from time to time.

The whole topic, in the forum context, is a spectator sport, albeit a potentially deadly serious one. Regardless of the forum arguments pro and con, some of which are more convincing than others, the proof of this particular pudding will remain in the eating. It has been known that some contributors, evidently setting themselves up as worldclass experts in the subject, have gone to great lengths in an attempt to persuade us all that their science is better than that of those with the best credentials, whose lives are dedicated to it. I repeat: for the layman, this is a spectator sport. It's a game wherein one can shout about the strengths and weaknesses of gameplay without being qualified to actually get out on the field and play the game.

Having said that, there's a good deal of intellectual humility in many of the posts, which certain others would have been well advised to emulate.

That's it. I do feel better for that.

I think there may be a lot of science in there.



This is the ultimate result of a cognitive feedback loop, assessing a general situation and future projections, analysing the consequences of such, comparing them with the desired outcome, think out alternatives to improve the projections and implement them. The latter happens here. But that's a proces with a lot of science involved. Or pseudo science?

Andre

(1) "Assessing the general situation and projections"

- Based on whose authority?

(2) "analysing the consequences of such"

- Depending upon who and what one chooses to believe etc.

(3) "think out alternatives to improve the projections and implement them"

- according to the conclusions drawn from (1) and (2)

"But that's a proces with a lot of science involved. Or pseudo science?"

- Exactly the point. It assumes a thorough understanding of the specific science involved, and a commensurate abililty to weed out bad science and pseudoscience.

There you go, there used to be times when who was right, was right. Nowadays the autority is right, the Surpreme Consensus counsil or His Holiness Generalissimo Demagoguerus. The truth doesn't exist anymore, these men make it up as they go along.



Fully agree, so where shall we start to weed out bad science and pseudoscience?

I can't help with that. I'll leave that to the experts and take a ringside seat, as has been my wont.

Not sure I agree with the first part of your rant about how people should stand on the sidelines, and let the experts duke it out, but after thinking about your post, I agree with this last one.

Useful discussion about these topics can't be had when they are sprinkled with smartass comments here and there. And reviewing my recent posts, I'm certainly guilty of this. I do expect this is a holdover from my first experiences in this forum, where I was repeatedly attacked by an infamous ex(thankfully)moderator. Repeated attacks on ones intelligence, accusations of being another poster with a duplicate account, even accusations of being on the pay roll of big oil, does make you a tad standoffish.

I will do my utmost to can the hyperbole, and general bad-attitude, when posting from now on.

Here here. I was accused of being a young male. LOL! Blacknad did 5 minutes of research on the web and confirmed I really am a middle aged female just like I said.

Weird thing is I live around the corner from the moderator's mother. He could have walked over to my house and verified my age and gender.

As for the smartass remarks, those are fine if they serve to inject humor into a conversation. I enjoy a good dose of sarcasm. If we can't discuss the facts without laughing at ourselves then we shouldn't be here.

Yes, I remember reading that. It's somewhat disturbing that a poster would actually have to meet with a moderator to "verify" their age and gender. I remember him challenging you to meet with him - hoping to catch you lying about your age/gender.

I wonder how many posters he drove away - I remember him driving another poster away after stating there are no male rape victms, where the perp is a woman. It's a wonder he wasn't removed earlier.

A bad moderator can kill a forum real quick. Even a dominating poster can kill a forum. I've seen that as well. Very hard to bring a forum back when it gets as low as this one is now.

For what it's worth I did complain about the moderator before I left. I got no reply from management at all. Wasn't the last time that happened to me either.

Recently I was on a forum I had been a member of since March of 02. Had a poster who was dominating the forum and mostly posted personal attacks. He took a dislike to me becaue I had been a lobbyist. He started posting hangman's nooses to me. I was getting no response from the owner per my complaints. She said she was having a problem with email and would get to mine soon. So I told everyone I was taking a break to give her time to deal with it. I got banned. When someone asked her why she said I had announced I was posting on another forum. Not true and I proved it. The jerk who was making threats is still posting there.

Here is what he posted to me:

Canuck: "Not sure I agree with the first part of your rant about how people should stand on the sidelines, and let the experts duke it out."

As I said, it's my personal view. I don't suggest that the issues should not be discussed - far from it - but participants need to recognise that this particular issue is exceptionally complex even for those 'experts'. I think that's consistent with what I said earlier. I may be presumptuous in thinking that there are, at best, very few such experts posting on this topic, and for any of us to adamantly proclaim with an air of total certainty that, for example, 'greenhouse gases produced by humans are NOT a significant factor in GW' is, in my view, rather brash over-confidence to say the least. Discussing probabilities is a different matter, and when the posts are presented in such a way they do tend to hold my interest rather more, even if they are, necessarily, limited to educated speculation.

To the extent that climate change is a political issue, then certainly no-one has reason to stand on the sidelines.
___

scpg02

We meet all kinds on the internet, don't we! I've found that some are best left alone. We have better things to do, and better forums to use. Which is why I'm here.

Very well, then, why not sit down at the ring here and observe the game of some weeding out of of bad science.

Andre, I take my hat off to you, and hope that you're getting your work published.

About this forum, I made several posts, but the reliance of people here on peer review while posting articles from the main stream media made me believe that no one here understood what was going on. I left for awhile in search for data. I looked for the facts themselves and did not rely on others to interpret them for me. I made my last comment above simply because I still expect this forum to be based on science; otherwise, it is no better than a run of the mill blog or forum.

scpg02,
I see no purpose served by posting these graphic images. Please refrain or in future I will edit your postings. This is a science forum, not an art gallery. And I don't think your images count as having artistic merit.

Amaranth
Moderator

You know they weren't meant as art, nor did I create them. I am a lobbyist and these were posted to me. I must say your response to them was stronger than the forum owner's where they originally appeared.

Interesting that you addressed this rather than comment on the bahavior of another moderator or the lack of response I received regarding my complaints about him.

As for editing my posts, go ahead. I left this forum once and have no problem doing so again. If you are that happy with your three posters and don't appreciate what I bring to this forum then so be it. I'm gone. Thanks for proving my point about bad moderation.

Quite frankly I am appalled at the thought of anyone allowing such images to be posted on any forum. The purpose of a forum is to encourage debate, not stifle diversity. I am in sympathy with you; no one should have to endure such crass antics and blatant threats. If I am aware of anyone on this forum doing such things they will be banned. I may not always agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it--within reason. I saw no purpose served by posting those ugly images here. I wouldn't tolerate anyone posting them here. This is a Science forum, not a flame pit. Let us keep our goals in sight and forsake the petty cruelty.

Nice to hear the terms of reference has been altered for the forum. Because as far as I could tell, Mr. Morgan's singular purpose here was to stifle diversity, repress debate and flame posters who didn't think exactly as he did.

Perhaps we've found the reason why he's not around these parts anymore.