stephen55
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2010
- Posts
- 2,564
It takes a while to sort it out....
I often get discouraged at the way trysail pastes endless graphs and charts. I also get confused by the many articles he copies to the thread and responses to them followed by reponses to responses...
I think that trysail doesn't accept the hypothesis that we are causing global warming/climate change. I'm not sure because a lot of the things he posts are very much in support of the hypothesis.
Above on this page is a copy of something from...
On the Credibility of Climate Research, Part II: Towards Rebuilding Trust
By Judith Curry, Ph.D., Georgia Institute of Technology
It's followed by a response...
A selection from Willis Eschenbach's response to Judith Curry's essay "On the Credibility of Climate Research, Part II:Towards Rebuilding Trust"
All well and good. Dr. Curry was writing about the damage done to the publics' views on scientific credibility by "Climategate", those e-mails to and from researchers at The University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit (CRU), and also by "Glaciergate". It starts off, after a brief introduction, with...
Climategate has now become broadened in scope to extend beyond the CRU emails to include glaciergate and a host of other issues associated with the IPCC. In responding to climategate, the climate research establishment has appealed to its own authority and failed to understand that climategate is primarily a crisis of trust. Finally, we have an editorial published in Science on February 10 from Ralph Cicerone, President of the National Academy of Science, that begins to articulate the trust issue: “This view reflects the fragile nature of trust between science and society, demonstrating that the perceived misbehavior of even a few scientists can diminish the credibility of science as a whole. What needs to be done? Two aspects need urgent attention: the general practice of science and the personal behaviors of scientists.”
It ends with...
No one really believes that the “science is settled” or that “the debate is over.” Scientists and others that say this seem to want to advance a particular agenda. There is nothing more detrimental to public trust than such statements.
And finally, I hope that this blogospheric experiment will demonstrate how the diversity of the different blogs can be used collectively to generate ideas and debate them, towards bringing some sanity to this whole situation surrounding the politicization of climate science and rebuilding trust with the public.
All in all, a well written blog on what happens when scientists behave badly and get caught. And a well written piece on why the public needs to educate themselves on the issue, and why scientists haven't done a very good job of teaching.
Here's part of what Willis Eschenbach had to say...
The solution to that is not, as you suggest, to give scientists a wider voice, or educate them in how to present their garbage to a wider audience.
The solution is for you to stop trying to pass off garbage as science. The solution is for you establishment climate scientists to police your own back yard. When Climategate broke, there was widespread outrage … well, widespread everywhere except in the climate science establishment. Other than a few lone voices, the silence there was deafening. Now there is another whitewash investigation, and the silence only deepens.
I guess what I'm getting to is that looking over Dr. Curry's many publications, lectures and letters, it's clear that ...
a) She firmly believes in the reality of global warming/climate change
b) She's meticulous in her research and publications
c) "Climategate" was a self-inflicted injury that never should have happened
d) Just because a few scientists behaved badly with some e-mails, the body of research and conclusions hasn't changed
I often get discouraged at the way trysail pastes endless graphs and charts. I also get confused by the many articles he copies to the thread and responses to them followed by reponses to responses...
I think that trysail doesn't accept the hypothesis that we are causing global warming/climate change. I'm not sure because a lot of the things he posts are very much in support of the hypothesis.
Above on this page is a copy of something from...
On the Credibility of Climate Research, Part II: Towards Rebuilding Trust
By Judith Curry, Ph.D., Georgia Institute of Technology
It's followed by a response...
A selection from Willis Eschenbach's response to Judith Curry's essay "On the Credibility of Climate Research, Part II:Towards Rebuilding Trust"
All well and good. Dr. Curry was writing about the damage done to the publics' views on scientific credibility by "Climategate", those e-mails to and from researchers at The University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit (CRU), and also by "Glaciergate". It starts off, after a brief introduction, with...
Climategate has now become broadened in scope to extend beyond the CRU emails to include glaciergate and a host of other issues associated with the IPCC. In responding to climategate, the climate research establishment has appealed to its own authority and failed to understand that climategate is primarily a crisis of trust. Finally, we have an editorial published in Science on February 10 from Ralph Cicerone, President of the National Academy of Science, that begins to articulate the trust issue: “This view reflects the fragile nature of trust between science and society, demonstrating that the perceived misbehavior of even a few scientists can diminish the credibility of science as a whole. What needs to be done? Two aspects need urgent attention: the general practice of science and the personal behaviors of scientists.”
It ends with...
No one really believes that the “science is settled” or that “the debate is over.” Scientists and others that say this seem to want to advance a particular agenda. There is nothing more detrimental to public trust than such statements.
And finally, I hope that this blogospheric experiment will demonstrate how the diversity of the different blogs can be used collectively to generate ideas and debate them, towards bringing some sanity to this whole situation surrounding the politicization of climate science and rebuilding trust with the public.
All in all, a well written blog on what happens when scientists behave badly and get caught. And a well written piece on why the public needs to educate themselves on the issue, and why scientists haven't done a very good job of teaching.
Here's part of what Willis Eschenbach had to say...
The solution to that is not, as you suggest, to give scientists a wider voice, or educate them in how to present their garbage to a wider audience.
The solution is for you to stop trying to pass off garbage as science. The solution is for you establishment climate scientists to police your own back yard. When Climategate broke, there was widespread outrage … well, widespread everywhere except in the climate science establishment. Other than a few lone voices, the silence there was deafening. Now there is another whitewash investigation, and the silence only deepens.
I guess what I'm getting to is that looking over Dr. Curry's many publications, lectures and letters, it's clear that ...
a) She firmly believes in the reality of global warming/climate change
b) She's meticulous in her research and publications
c) "Climategate" was a self-inflicted injury that never should have happened
d) Just because a few scientists behaved badly with some e-mails, the body of research and conclusions hasn't changed