Where should one look (climate)
Posted: Wed Apr 03, 2013 1:59 am
It is pretty odd that Droopy keeps making claims about AGW that I can find no evidence for in the scientific literature or among any of the many scientists that I know.
He claims that the AGW is a dead hypothesis and that empirical evidence has proven the whole thing to be a hoax.
He gives the impression that only a fool would be unaware of the the collapse of AGW.
Well, I;m looking around and I don't see it.
Well, I can't find it anywhere except in nonscientific places like conservative blogs and various oddball sties totally analogous to the numerous creationist websites.
I can identify dozens and dozens of mainstream scientific societies that have made statements but none that say anything like what Droopy says.
For example, nothing on wikipedia has changed. The consensus exists just as before.
The following chart surely doesn't tell the story of the demise of a theory. Quite the contrary.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e ... inion2.png
Notice that plumbers, engineers, bloggers, or even local weathermen are not included (for good reason). Nevertheless several groups are included for perspective (such as simply climatologists, publishing climate scientists, top 100 climate scientists, etc.)
It takes a massively conspiratorial mind to imagine that this is all stunt or a case of herd mentality.
AGW is alive and well and continues to gather evidential support. It is the evidence that creates the consensus (a result of science not a method) amoung those with the presice training to evaluate the evidence (which doesn't not include random geologists or weathermen, aging inactive climatologist from a different era, and certainly not Droopy) Those are the facts folk. Plain and simple.
AGW denialism is just one among many similar social phenomena which include
1) creationism
2) UFOlogy
3) Alternaitve theories about AIDS
4) Moon landing deniers
5) Holocaust denialism
6) 911 conspiracy theory
My point is not so much that AGW is true (though this is indeed what the evidence to date is telling us) but rather how strange it is that Droppy et. al. don't even have a clear picture of the state of the science. They think they are winning the debate and that AGW is dying (they aren't and it isn't).
Individuals in each of these groups find each other on the internet and form a close system of mutually supported confirmation bias--a reality distortion bubble of like minded conspiracy paranoids. In each case, the evidence is against them but they believe incorrigably the very opposite. They are also a tiny minority amoung educated people despite thier own self perceptions. It is a psychosocial rather than scientific matter.
The only thing comparible to talking to Droopy is talking to the one and only schizophrenic that I know: Now amount of evidence and break his delusions and in fact contrary evidence somehow becomes evidence in some twisted way. Just watch how he reacts to the evidence of consensus in the chart I linked to or to the dominance of AGW supportive publications in top journals.
"A 2010 paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States (PNAS) reviewed publication and citation data for 1,372 climate researchers and drew the following two conclusions:
(i) 97–98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field support the tenets of ACC (Anthropogenic Climate Change) outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and (ii) the relative climate expertise and scientific prominence of the researchers unconvinced of ACC are substantially below that of the convinced researchers.
"In an October 2011 paper published in the International Journal of Public Opinion Research, researchers from George Mason University analyzed the results of a survey of 489 scientists working in academia, government, and industry. The scientists polled were members of the American Geophysical Union or the American Meteorological Society and listed in the 23rd edition of American Men and Women of Science, a biographical reference work on leading American scientists. Of those surveyed, 97% agreed that that global temperatures have risen over the past century. Moreover, 84% agreed that "human-induced greenhouse warming" is now occurring. Only 5% disagreed with the idea that human activity is a significant cause of global warming"-wiki
He claims that the AGW is a dead hypothesis and that empirical evidence has proven the whole thing to be a hoax.
He gives the impression that only a fool would be unaware of the the collapse of AGW.
Well, I;m looking around and I don't see it.
Well, I can't find it anywhere except in nonscientific places like conservative blogs and various oddball sties totally analogous to the numerous creationist websites.
I can identify dozens and dozens of mainstream scientific societies that have made statements but none that say anything like what Droopy says.
For example, nothing on wikipedia has changed. The consensus exists just as before.
The following chart surely doesn't tell the story of the demise of a theory. Quite the contrary.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e ... inion2.png
Notice that plumbers, engineers, bloggers, or even local weathermen are not included (for good reason). Nevertheless several groups are included for perspective (such as simply climatologists, publishing climate scientists, top 100 climate scientists, etc.)
It takes a massively conspiratorial mind to imagine that this is all stunt or a case of herd mentality.
AGW is alive and well and continues to gather evidential support. It is the evidence that creates the consensus (a result of science not a method) amoung those with the presice training to evaluate the evidence (which doesn't not include random geologists or weathermen, aging inactive climatologist from a different era, and certainly not Droopy) Those are the facts folk. Plain and simple.
AGW denialism is just one among many similar social phenomena which include
1) creationism
2) UFOlogy
3) Alternaitve theories about AIDS
4) Moon landing deniers
5) Holocaust denialism
6) 911 conspiracy theory
My point is not so much that AGW is true (though this is indeed what the evidence to date is telling us) but rather how strange it is that Droppy et. al. don't even have a clear picture of the state of the science. They think they are winning the debate and that AGW is dying (they aren't and it isn't).
Individuals in each of these groups find each other on the internet and form a close system of mutually supported confirmation bias--a reality distortion bubble of like minded conspiracy paranoids. In each case, the evidence is against them but they believe incorrigably the very opposite. They are also a tiny minority amoung educated people despite thier own self perceptions. It is a psychosocial rather than scientific matter.
The only thing comparible to talking to Droopy is talking to the one and only schizophrenic that I know: Now amount of evidence and break his delusions and in fact contrary evidence somehow becomes evidence in some twisted way. Just watch how he reacts to the evidence of consensus in the chart I linked to or to the dominance of AGW supportive publications in top journals.
"A 2010 paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States (PNAS) reviewed publication and citation data for 1,372 climate researchers and drew the following two conclusions:
(i) 97–98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field support the tenets of ACC (Anthropogenic Climate Change) outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and (ii) the relative climate expertise and scientific prominence of the researchers unconvinced of ACC are substantially below that of the convinced researchers.
"In an October 2011 paper published in the International Journal of Public Opinion Research, researchers from George Mason University analyzed the results of a survey of 489 scientists working in academia, government, and industry. The scientists polled were members of the American Geophysical Union or the American Meteorological Society and listed in the 23rd edition of American Men and Women of Science, a biographical reference work on leading American scientists. Of those surveyed, 97% agreed that that global temperatures have risen over the past century. Moreover, 84% agreed that "human-induced greenhouse warming" is now occurring. Only 5% disagreed with the idea that human activity is a significant cause of global warming"-wiki
