This is an unofficial Bulletin Board - owned and run by its users. We welcome all fans of the Mighty Collingwood Football Club.
Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
^Given I just wrote this, hardly, because individuals aren't a preponderance of authority.
Why bother posting individuals for or against? It's like watching crackpot religious sects throw quotes at each other.
pietillidie wrote:My assumption is that authority in academics would be roughly about qualification, peer-reviewed publication, appointment, recognition and representation, much like any field. Publication being work done, appointment being work acknowledged, recognition being further acknowledgement, and representation being interests represented, etc.
The climate system is broad and has a broad footprint, so its study is going to rope in various disciplines. But, because warming change is a macro theory, based on a preponderance of systemic evidence, you would need to be across that evidence from a focused position to have a serious view of the whole.
This is why on-field/near-field specialists plainly warrant weight. Macro bodies then defer to those on-field/near-field specialists.
On that basis, the weight of numbers is ridiculously in favour of warming change.
pietillidie wrote:
Why bother posting individuals for or against? It's like watching crackpot religious sects throw quotes at each other.
One of your most insightful posts ever. 100% spot on.
Because some on here say that it's a cut and dry issue, no debate required and that anyone who questions that is a nut job or paid off by the oil companies. Yet there are many reputable scientists who don't.
It took the majority if scientists over 20 centuries to accept that Pythagoras might have been onto something with his - the world is a sphere theory.
I hope the climate change furphy doesn't drag on that long!
Skids wrote:I suppose you'll denounce this bloke as a crackpot too?.....
He is not a crackpot. He is a paid agent of the extremist Heartland Institute who will do anything and say anything for enough money.
He works in the climate denial industry now, but he has previously worked in the tobacco denial industry, for both Phillp Morris and the Tobacco Institute.
You'd have to be very ignorant or a credulous fool (or of course both) to take seriously anything this discredited spokesman for discredited causes says.
The fact that the denial lobby is now reduced to citing the Singers of this world shows just how desperately it is scratching for something - anything! - to print these days.
Skids wrote:I suppose you'll denounce this bloke as a crackpot too?.....
He is not a crackpot. He is a paid agent of the extremist Heartland Institute who will do anything and say anything for enough money.
He works in the climate denial industry now, but he has previously worked in the tobacco denial industry, for both Phillp Morris and the Tobacco Institute.
You'd have to be very ignorant or a credulous fool (or of course both) to take seriously anything this discredited spokesman for discredited causes says.
The fact that the denial lobby is now reduced to citing the Singers of this world shows just how desperately it is scratching for something - anything! - to print these days.
You mean he's not a credible scientist
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman
So you are comfortable with uncritically absorbing paid climate denial messages from the same old warhorse who used to get paid for pretending that smoking isn't bad for you?
By the way, are you interested in some investments? Can't go wrong with these Nigerian Dictator specials. Guaranteed to make your fortune.
Pa Marmo wrote:http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/08/01/delingpole-australia-bureau-of-meteorology-caught-erasing-record-low-temperatures/
Interesting
The scientist quoted in the article is a biologist. No meterological credentials or training. She also previously worked for the Institute of Public Affairs.
No relevant qualifications & paid by a bunch of climate deniers.
Article a biased waste of time.
And the fact that he isn't a climatologist means its ok that the bureau lied, you just swallow it all hook, line and sinker.
