Comments on: Skeptics push back against climate “skeptics” http://carbonfixated.com/skeptics-push-back-against-climate-skeptics/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=skeptics-push-back-against-climate-skeptics Photosynthesising in a CO2-enriched world Sun, 15 Apr 2012 12:19:10 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: John Mashey http://carbonfixated.com/skeptics-push-back-against-climate-skeptics/comment-page-1/#comment-1713 John Mashey Fri, 26 Mar 2010 20:39:20 +0000 http://carbonfixated.com/skeptics-push-back-against-climate-skeptics/#comment-1713 Thanks much for supporting Kendrick, who has taken amazing flak on this . The following may help explain all this. Anti-science us a bit different from pseudo-science, although the former sometimes employs the latter. Anti-science seeks to hide inconvenient knowledge, whereas many who do pseudoscience wish their ideas to become part of knowledge. There exist a quite sophisticated anti-science machine, with origins in the tobacco wars, when tactics were inventented that have bee used since. To learn who does this, how, tactics, etc look at the first few pages of http://www.desmogblog.com/crescendo-climategate-cacophony Thanks much for supporting Kendrick, who has taken amazing flak on this . The following may help explain all this.
Anti-science us a bit different from pseudo-science, although the former sometimes employs the latter. Anti-science seeks to hide inconvenient knowledge, whereas many who do pseudoscience wish their ideas to become part of knowledge.

There exist a quite sophisticated anti-science machine, with origins in the tobacco wars, when tactics were inventented that have bee used since.

To learn who does this, how, tactics, etc look at the first few pages of
http://www.desmogblog.com/crescendo-climategate-cacophony

]]> By: Chris Frazier http://carbonfixated.com/skeptics-push-back-against-climate-skeptics/comment-page-1/#comment-1712 Chris Frazier Fri, 26 Mar 2010 19:13:21 +0000 http://carbonfixated.com/skeptics-push-back-against-climate-skeptics/#comment-1712 Skeptics are quite rightly proud of their reluctance to believe blindly in what they are told, to expect credible, verifiable evidence and sound logic before adopting outlandish claims. That anthropogenic effects on our climate threaten a potentially apocalyptic future for our planet unless we take positive, and potentially drastic steps to avoid it is just such an outlandish claim. As they say, exceptional claims require exceptional proof. Unlike alien visitors, big-foot, and telepathy, however, climate change and the effect of humans in bringing it about has been increasingly and consistently verified by a building consensus of scientific study from numerous approaches. Mr. Frazier and CSI reviewed that body of evidence before taking their stand, with due skepticism, and found that it met the test of scientific plausability. It is notable that they were not early riders on this bandwagon. I would like to think that other skeptics who disagree still might simply have higher burdens of proof than this. Unfortunately, it is much more likely that they are trusting sources of information that are not sound, scientific, or unbiased or that they have formed an opinion even though they are uninformed on the issue. Countering that sort of thing is what the skeptics movement has always been about, even if, as in this case, the work involves cleaning up your own house. Skeptics are quite rightly proud of their reluctance to believe blindly in what they are told, to expect credible, verifiable evidence and sound logic before adopting outlandish claims. That anthropogenic effects on our climate threaten a potentially apocalyptic future for our planet unless we take positive, and potentially drastic steps to avoid it is just such an outlandish claim. As they say, exceptional claims require exceptional proof. Unlike alien visitors, big-foot, and telepathy, however, climate change and the effect of humans in bringing it about has been increasingly and consistently verified by a building consensus of scientific study from numerous approaches. Mr. Frazier and CSI reviewed that body of evidence before taking their stand, with due skepticism, and found that it met the test of scientific plausability. It is notable that they were not early riders on this bandwagon. I would like to think that other skeptics who disagree still might simply have higher burdens of proof than this. Unfortunately, it is much more likely that they are trusting sources of information that are not sound, scientific, or unbiased or that they have formed an opinion even though they are uninformed on the issue. Countering that sort of thing is what the skeptics movement has always been about, even if, as in this case, the work involves cleaning up your own house.

]]> By: Länkar 2010-03-18 http://carbonfixated.com/skeptics-push-back-against-climate-skeptics/comment-page-1/#comment-1555 Länkar 2010-03-18 Thu, 18 Mar 2010 11:00:10 +0000 http://carbonfixated.com/skeptics-push-back-against-climate-skeptics/#comment-1555 [...] Skeptics push back against climate “skeptics” [...] [...] Skeptics push back against climate “skeptics” [...]

]]>