New gubberment website - Tries to convince us of MMGW

[AJI]

Government Chief Scientific Adviser Professor Sir John Beddington has launched a new website to try and persuade the public that religious-type make-believe science should be followed by all :

http://www.bis.gov.uk/go-science/climatescience

The main page that addresses MMGW :
http://www.bis.gov.uk/go-science/climatescience/ca...


There are the usual short period hockey-stick graphs that are a favourite of government types that try to scare public opinion. But overall its the usual BS spouted by the tax creators.

[turbobloke]

At a time of budget constraint, what on earth possessed somebody to spend public money (assuming it's not sponsored by one of the vested interests) on promoting fairy stories? An appalling waste.

[Somewhatfoolish]

Well AJI if you're not convinced of MMGW by 99% of decent scientists in this field you're not going to be convinced by the government. I would certainly never suggest that you listen to the government over the scientists.

However, the scientists are in agreement about MMGW. And so your choices are to deny that and get into crazy conspiracy threads, or you can instead accept the science and try to fight the nonsense left wing ste that tends to go with it, primarily because scientists tend to be lefties* and folk are ignoring this

UNTIL YOU AND OTHER RIGHT THINKING FOLK START DOING THE LATTER THEN WE'RE IN SERIOUS TROUBLE. FOR GOODNESS SAKE PLEASE TRY TO SEE THE LIGHT

*With wonderful exceptions like Thatcher, who both introduced this sort of thing as serious government issue and yet happened to be certainly the best PM of the 20th century - better even than Churchill - and perhaps the best PM of all time.

[Blue Meanie]

Science is not done by consensus.

[Somewhatfoolish]

Blue Meanie said:

Science is not done by consensus.

Correct in theory.

In practice, unless you understand it enough, then it is - you should accept the consenus view of the field unless you have a very good reason, as they know better than you

Naturally this will mean the cutting edge passes you by. But it also filters out a helluva lot of crap...

[nelly1]

Somewhatfoolish said:

Well AJI if you're not convinced of MMGW by 99% of decent scientists in this field you're not going to be convinced by the government. I would certainly never suggest that you listen to the government over the scientists.

However, the scientists are in agreement about MMGW. And so your choices are to deny that and get into crazy conspiracy threads, or you can instead accept the science and try to fight the nonsense left wing ste that tends to go with it, primarily because scientists tend to be lefties and folk are ignoring this

UNTIL YOU AND OTHER RIGHT THINKING FOLK START DOING THE LATTER THEN WE'RE IN SERIOUS TROUBLE. FOR GOODNESS SAKE PLEASE TRY TO SEE THE LIGHT

[Blue Meanie]

Somewhatfoolish said:

Blue Meanie said:

Science is not done by consensus.

Correct in theory.

In practice, unless you understand it enough, then it is - you should accept the consenus view of the field unless you have a very good reason, as they know better than you

Naturally this will mean the cutting edge passes you by. But it also filters out a helluva lot of crap...

Correct, full stop. The truth is the truth, even if no-one believes it.

[perdu]

Somewhatfoolish said:

Well AJI if you're not convinced of MMGW by 99% of decent scientists in this field you're not going to be convinced by the government. I would certainly never suggest that you listen to the government over the scientists.

However, the scientists are in agreement about MMGW. And so your choices are to deny that and get into crazy conspiracy threads, or you can instead accept the science and try to fight the nonsense left wing ste that tends to go with it, primarily because scientists tend to be lefties* and folk are ignoring this

UNTIL YOU AND OTHER RIGHT THINKING FOLK START DOING THE LATTER THEN WE'RE IN SERIOUS TROUBLE. FOR GOODNESS SAKE PLEASE TRY TO SEE THE LIGHT

*With wonderful exceptions like Thatcher, who both introduced this sort of thing as serious government issue and yet happened to be certainly the best PM of the 20th century - better even than Churchill - and perhaps the best PM of all time.

When 99% of scientists(did you see what I did there?) rather than the 1 or 2% of scientists that concentrate on this very lucrative field agreed maybe there wouldn't be any need to shout.

Emotive science just doesn't convince me.

I doubt if I'll be able to attend a Royal Fireworks display on the Thames in my lifetime, at best I haven't more than 40 years to go, but the planet changes on its own...

It IS a good thing to stop polluting the bloody place but it isn't a good thing to tell me it's (almost) all my fault that the changes occur.

Especially when it has all been used as an excuse to tax me till my balls squeak.


(Who decides who are DECENT scientists in this field, I wonder?)

[Mojocvh]

nelly1 said:

Somewhatfoolish said:

Well AJI if you're not convinced of MMGW by 99% of decent scientists in this field you're not going to be convinced by the government. I would certainly never suggest that you listen to the government over the scientists.

However, the scientists are in agreement about MMGW. And so your choices are to deny that and get into crazy conspiracy threads, or you can instead accept the science and try to fight the nonsense left wing ste that tends to go with it, primarily because scientists tend to be lefties and folk are ignoring this

UNTIL YOU AND OTHER RIGHT THINKING FOLK START DOING THE LATTER THEN WE'RE IN SERIOUS TROUBLE. FOR GOODNESS SAKE PLEASE TRY TO SEE THE LIGHT

what an apt username.

[tank slapper]

Somewhatfoolish said:

Correct in theory.

In practice, unless you understand it enough, then it is - you should accept the consenus view of the field unless you have a very good reason, as they know better than you

Sorry but that argument doesn't wash. If everyone accepted the consensus and never asked questions then no progress would ever be made. Everyone in the world could believe something, but it only takes one person to come up with the correct answer to completely disprove all of them.

Accepting someone's authority may be fine if they were completely transparent in their work, but where there is continual political interference where the scientists are complicit in that, then those scientists can hardly complain when people question their objectivity.

[Somewhatfoolish]

I'm not going to waste my time trying to convince folk of MMGW. They can do the research for themselves.

All I would say. If you believe it's nonsense, and santa claus or whoever has a better idea... For a few moments, assume that it's as true as other theories of similar respectability. Would it be unreasonable for government to treat them in the same way?

Another thought experiment: Imagine it's total bks, but almost everyone with a scientific education believes the same way as I do. Is it better to argue the science or argue the politics?

And having thought about that... if the science is true then have you become a raving leftie? If not why are you arguing about this so much?

This is a dangerous game and you should stop it now unless you really, really, really believe your crud.

[Blue Meanie]

Ad Hominem attacks are hardly the sign of an intellectual.

[MilnerR]

We can have a scientific debate if you like. There are manifold inconvenient truths that are out there in the literature that give those with limited critical thinking a real tizzy fit. The science is wide open, and it appears to becoming more and more wide open as predictions are failing to come true. There are two major weaknesses:

1) there is no signal in the climate data that shows an anthropogenic cause i.e the natural variations far outstrip any othe signals

2) the earth is refusing to behave as the models predict, if anything it appears that global temps could well be trending sharply down.

Edited by MilnerR on Friday 17th September 00:17

[tank slapper]

Somewhatfoolish said:

I'm not going to waste my time trying to convince folk of MMGW. They can do the research for themselves.

All I would say. If you believe it's nonsense, and santa claus or whoever has a better idea... For a few moments, assume that it's as true as other theories of similar respectability. Would it be unreasonable for government to treat them in the same way?

Another thought experiment: Imagine it's total bks, but almost everyone with a scientific education believes the same way as I do. Is it better to argue the science or argue the politics?

And having thought about that... if the science is true then have you become a raving leftie? If not why are you arguing about this so much?

This is a dangerous game and you should stop it now unless you really, really, really believe your crud.

What are you talking about? The scientific method works through implicit scepticism. Disbelief should be the default position. A good scientist should never stop asking questions and trying to disprove and improve a theory. Only when almost every avenue has been exhausted can you come close to saying that you understand something sufficiently to call it fact. If a theory is right, every single attempt to disprove it will fail.

Climate science is so far away from that position that the continual propaganda surrounding it is laughable. Time and again, we have heard pronouncements of catastrophic figures regarding sea levels, temperatures and god knows what else, where most of these figures have been pulled from the backside of the person programming the computer models.

Edited by tank slapper on Friday 17th September 00:17

[perdu]

I get it now

I'm a scientist so I'm a better thinker than you so you should all stand up and honour me




Where's that bloody parrot?




I don't argue politics and won't argue science.

There's a new theory round the corner, I hope it doesn't rock my poor little world like MMGW tries to.

you have great theories

so do I

I prefer mine

Edited by perdu on Friday 17th September 00:18

edits 'cos it's late
oops

Edited by perdu on Friday 17th September 00:19

[Blue Meanie]

You know that they are un scientific the moment they say "the debate is over"... Science and debate is NEVER over.

[Somewhatfoolish]

There is a significant irony when one combines the above few posts but I'm not going to point it out... it just a massive waste of time.

I shall instead sit back and relax. If I turn out to be wrong, and you guys turn out to be right, then I will be entirely happy.

It's the scenario when I'm right that worries me.

This ste about scientific method is laughable though... what do you think Karl Popper would have said?

[s2art]

Somewhatfoolish said:

There is a significant irony when one combines the above few posts but I'm not going to point it out... it just a massive waste of time.

I shall instead sit back and relax. If I turn out to be wrong, and you guys turn out to be right, then I will be entirely happy.

It's the scenario when I'm right that worries me.

This ste about scientific method is laughable though... what do you think Karl Popper would have said?

Karl Popper would be gobsmacked at the AGW promoters and be firmly in the skeptic side of the argument until some falsifiable predictions could be tested.

[Somewhatfoolish]

s2art said:

Somewhatfoolish said:

There is a significant irony when one combines the above few posts but I'm not going to point it out... it just a massive waste of time.

I shall instead sit back and relax. If I turn out to be wrong, and you guys turn out to be right, then I will be entirely happy.

It's the scenario when I'm right that worries me.

This ste about scientific method is laughable though... what do you think Karl Popper would have said?

Karl Popper would be gobsmacked at the AGW promoters and be firmly in the skeptic side of the argument until some falsifiable predictions could be tested.

Are you seriously saying the AGW "promoters" (lol) haven't made falsifiable predicitons?

[Somewhatfoolish]

Anyhow this remains the same as how I said before; feel free to convince 95% of lurkers, the majority of whom want to believe what you want to believe... but this doesn't change reality...