3 ms·

"Science provides us with data as near to facts as it's possible to get; it's up to us how to interpret those facts." What is your definition of the word "scie

"Science provides us with data as near to facts as it's possible to get; it's up to us how to interpret those facts." What is your definition of the word "science" in this sentence? Seems an odd use of the word. "Science" does not provide us with data. Particular people and institutions provide us with data. Furthermore when it comes to climatology, the data is hardly clear cut. All the results and predictions you read about in the paper are based on, as the article says "elaborate statistical techniques." When I hear that, my alarm bells go off. Using "elaborate statistical techniques" one can prove pretty much whatever one wants to prove.

yequalsx 11y ago
I disagree with your use of "prove" when you wrote Using "elaborate statistical techniques" one can prove pretty much whatever one wants to prove. One may be able to massage data and create a nice looking chart to give an incorrect impression to unsuspecting people. This does not constitute a proof and it certainly won't pass muster with others who look at the same data and do their own statistical analyses.
- oortcloud 11y ago
  "prove" should have been in scare quotes.
  - yequalsx 11y ago
    Sure, but he point I made still stands. You can't pull shenanigans with the data when other experts look at it as well.
coldpie 11y ago
I agree that my words were poorly phrased. I wanted to communicate that the IPCC report is really the best information we have, and an incredible amount of effort went into ensuring the information in the report is solid. > one can prove pretty much whatever one wants to prove Yes, but everyone knows this and this has been gone over again and again and everyone who studies this stuff and understands the science agrees with the report. This isn't a couple yahoos with a copy of SimEarth, this is almost every single climate scientist on the planet.

yequalsx 11y ago

I disagree with your use of "prove" when you wrote Using "elaborate statistical techniques" one can prove pretty much whatever one wants to prove. One may be able to massage data and create a nice looking chart to give an incorrect impression to unsuspecting people. This does not constitute a proof and it certainly won't pass muster with others who look at the same data and do their own statistical analyses.

oortcloud 11y ago
"prove" should have been in scare quotes.
- yequalsx 11y ago
  Sure, but he point I made still stands. You can't pull shenanigans with the data when other experts look at it as well.

coldpie 11y ago

I agree that my words were poorly phrased. I wanted to communicate that the IPCC report is really the best information we have, and an incredible amount of effort went into ensuring the information in the report is solid. > one can prove pretty much whatever one wants to prove Yes, but everyone knows this and this has been gone over again and again and everyone who studies this stuff and understands the science agrees with the report. This isn't a couple yahoos with a copy of SimEarth, this is almost every single climate scientist on the planet.