4 ms·

The author's bias is obvious from the first paragraph. Can you trust anyone on climate change?

• lionhearted 17y ago
  > Can you trust anyone on climate change? Okay, let's say we can't. Should we: (A) Spend trillions of dollars and place complex legal restrictions on activities that quickly develop the world (B) Give it a while and keep researching The call for immediate action is based on the idea that Armageddon is coming around soon if we don't do anything. That's looking more false by the day as people investigate. The largest piece they had for Armageddon level climate change was the hockey stick graph, which has been thoroughly debunked now. > But a funny thing happened on the way to Copenhagen: a couple of Canadian researchers, McIntyre and McKitrick, found that when they ran simulations of "red noise" random principle components data into Mann's reconstruction model, 99% of the time it produced the same hockey stick pattern. They attributed this to Mann's method / time frame for selecting of principle components. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=992073 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=992073 So - yes, let's say everyone is questionable right now. Isn't that a pretty good reason not to spend trillions of dollars on programs of questionable effectiveness? At least until we learn more? You'd have to be convinced of an imminent Armageddon to argue otherwise, and that's looking more and more unlikely by the day.