Klimaforskning - hjemmeside
Startet av Amatør1, januar 20, 2014, 23:14:13 PM
SitatSitatAmatør1 says:January 20, 2014 at 10:22 am SitatFeel free to be as upset as you wish. – AnthonyThis kind of dogmatism does no good. I have my doubts about the correctness of these theories, but I will fight until the end to defend their right to publish.REPLY: If you read my essay, you'll see clearly that I state I have no issues with the publication of the papers. If the only reason was that they wrote a defiant sentence against the IPCC, then I'd be quite up in arms about the whole affair as being unfair and arbitrary. But, that wasn't the only reason, and the email campaign against the journal wasn't started by that one sentence, it was started due to the pal-review issue.It's the process of publication that's the issue, yet these folks are brushing aside the fact that there are published rules for the process, and they broke them, then they got called out by the journal. Now matter how you try, you can't argue around that fact. That's why I say "feel free to be as upset as you wish" It's wasted energy.Trying to rationalize that their work was above the rules is just ridiculous.We routinely admonish "the team" for their exploits in pal-review. We should apply the same standard to our own people who play in the peer-review sandbox. – Anthony
SitatAmatør1 says:January 20, 2014 at 10:22 am SitatFeel free to be as upset as you wish. – AnthonyThis kind of dogmatism does no good. I have my doubts about the correctness of these theories, but I will fight until the end to defend their right to publish.
SitatFeel free to be as upset as you wish. – Anthony
Sitat fra: Jostemikk på mars 14, 2012, 20:10:48 PMHva kvalifiserer til betegnelsen lukewarmer?Her er et kort sitat fra Wikipedia - Lucia Liljegren:SitatIn the climate change debate, Lucia classifies herself as a "lukewarmer": a person who recognizes global warming, but doubts the severity of the problem, and the certainty of climate science predictions.Man er enig i mainstreams forståelse av atmosfæreeffekten, til dels også positiv feedback. Felles for mange av de jeg har sett som ser på seg selv som lukevarmers skiller seg mest fra alarmistene ved at de setter strenge regler for akseptabel akademisk oppførsel, samt at de ikke ser på CO2-effekten som noe spesielt stort problem, og mener at vi fint rekker tilpasse oss før vi allikevel går tom for fossilt brensel, samt at det ikke finnes noe "tipping point".De fleste mener også at den kinetiske energi fra IR, til tross for at de ikke kan trenge lenger ned i vannoverflaten enn sin egen bølgelengde, på en eller annen mystisk måte er i stand til å varme havet selv uten hjelp fra opprørt hav med dertil hørende miksing av overflatelaget. Felles for alle som tror på dette er at de blir fjerne i blikket og forsvinner fra diskusjonen hver eneste gang de blir stilt vriene spørsmål. Ja bortsett fra Anthony Watts, Roy Spencer og Willis Echenbach, da. De blir sinte og kommer med stygge karakteristikker av sine meningsmotstandere, eller tillater slikt å skje.Just my two cents.
SitatIn the climate change debate, Lucia classifies herself as a "lukewarmer": a person who recognizes global warming, but doubts the severity of the problem, and the certainty of climate science predictions.
Sitat fra: stjakobs på januar 24, 2014, 16:21:56 PMPointman advarer også om dette
Sitat fra: stjakobs på januar 24, 2014, 16:21:56 PMPointman advarer også om dette:http://thepointman.wordpress.com/2014/01/23/cool-it/Når du samhandler med alarmister kan du etterhvert bli så påvirket av dem, at du begynner å anta noen av de samme fanatiske trekkene som dem."There is also an insidious danger to this sort of interaction with them; you start to get imprinted by them. If you're not careful, you soon start to take on the same fanatical traits that you're fighting, which is an even worse outcome. If you look, you'll see this has happened at some of the more combative blogs on global warming. If the point of blogging is to inform and persuade, then it's readily apparent that such vicious gladiatorial displays will quickly alienate the average person. It's for this reason and a lack of proper moderation, that so many once highly respected blogs, have become PR liabilities in the fight against eco-fascism."
SitatPointman says: January 19, 2014 at 5:00 pm Much as I admire you Anthony Watts, I have to disagree. It's part of my wider disagreement with this whole debate and how picky and academic the whole thing is. Yes, I of course understand scientific integrity has been lost by the alarmists and your concern that "our side" shouldn't go down the same route. In the round, I don't think integrity was lost in this case but given such a small pool of reviewers of a few skeptic papers who wouldn't immediately, and without getting past the abstract, kick it out of play – we are where we are. Sorry mate, when you get a shot, you take it. I'm an academic, who's learnt how debased what's laughingly called climate science actually is. Our science kills people and that was never what I signed up for.I really don't give a damn arguing the level field scientific merits of phrenologists or eugenicists with them – I just want to stop them dead. They're just junk science which hurts people.Pointman REPLY: I respect well phrased and polite disagreement. Thanks – Anthony
Sitat fra: Bebben på januar 25, 2014, 12:50:36 PMOg gjett hvem den konsise setningen "Our science kills people and that was never what I signed up for" minner meg om.... FOIA ja. Uten at jeg påstår noe.
SitatIt's easy for many of us in the western world to accept a tiny green inconvenience
SitatUSA politics is alien to me, neither am I from the UK. There is life outside the Anglo-American sphere.