3 ms·

So why do people trust the dissenting scientists? What leads them to that option over simply going with the majority? I've never understood that, but the cynic

So why do people trust the dissenting scientists? What leads them to that option over simply going with the majority? I've never understood that, but the cynic in me thinks they're simply looking for someone that they already agree with.

mistermann 10y ago
> So why do people trust the dissenting scientists? That's a great question. At least for myself, I don't immediately trust her (why would I without reading a substantial part of her work) - it is that when someone asks obviously informed questions, and answers are refused, I assume the person being asked the question is lying. In the youtube video, the senator is very clearing presenting himself as being far more informed on the topic than he is. He is (perhaps unknowingly) being dishonest, so I trust her more.
- DonHopkins 10y ago
  Since you're so adept at deciding who to trust and judging people's honesty by watching their facial expressions and body language on television, what do you have to say about Judith Curry blinking continuously at 85 blinks per minute during this FOX News interview? https://youtu.be/g5LpwL4NKbw https://youtu.be/g5LpwL4NKbw Do you trust what this guy says about blinking and lying? https://youtu.be/HiTbd4Mc3kk https://youtu.be/HiTbd4Mc3kk Have you ever read and listened to the words she's actually written and said? Or did you only listen to Tucker Carlson's leading questions and slanted innuendo while interviewing her on FOX News? And how much do you think they're paying her to come on the show and stare into the camera and lie while blinking at 85 BPM? She directly contradicts your claims (and her own) in her own words: "Nobody and certainly not myself is claiming that I am persecuted or there is a plot that is out to get me." -Judith Curry http://www.keithkloor.com/?p=3734 http://www.keithkloor.com/?p=3734 -- you're the one who's incorrectly claiming that she was somehow "silenced". The late great Stephen Schneider said: "So they make this assertion that they’re being systematically excluded, because they have no other argument, they no have evidence for the assertion. Let them do a study. Let them show us the letters of all the papers that have been rejected. What we did is look at real evidence, independently collected: How many papers, and how many citations. That’s independent, and the only way you can claim it isn’t true is to invoke some massive conspiracy that is frankly laughable." -Stephen Schneider https://thinkprogress.org/interview-with-scientist-stephen-schneider-on-his-expert-credibility-in-climate-change-study-d927e9428157#.ruyiz93rz https://thinkprogress.org/interview-with-scientist-stephen-s... So show us your evidence. Give us the names of scientists who have been silenced, or retract your false claim and conspiracy theory. But there is no doubt: Judith Curry is most certainly not one of those silenced scientists you hypothesize. And remember what Stephen Schneider also said: "We've seen a lot of strawmen from Judy lately. It is frankly shocking to see such a good scientist take that kind of a turn to sloppy thinking. I have no explanation for it." -Steven Schneider http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101101/full/news.2010.577.html http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101101/full/news.2010.577.ht...
  - Chris2048 10y ago
    > Give us the names of scientists who have been silenced "hear, hear, tell us what it sounded like, this tree that fell in the woods while no one was around!"
    - DonHopkins 10y ago
      So the one person you named wasn't silenced, you don't know any more names, and don't have any other evidence to support your claim, so therefore your conspiracy theory is that it's impossible to even know them, but they exist anyway. You've just proven my point. The late Stephen Schneider also made the same point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Schneider https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Schneider "So they make this assertion that they’re being systematically excluded, because they have no other argument, they no have evidence for the assertion. Let them do a study. Let them show us the letters of all the papers that have been rejected. What we did is look at real evidence, independently collected: How many papers, and how many citations. That’s independent, and the only way you can claim it isn’t true is to invoke some massive conspiracy that is frankly laughable." -Stephen Schneider https://thinkprogress.org/interview-with-scientist-stephen-schneider-on-his-expert-credibility-in-climate-change-study-d927e9428157 https://thinkprogress.org/interview-with-scientist-stephen-s... And remember what Stephen Schneider also said about the person whose words and conspiracy theories you and misterman are parroting: "We've seen a lot of strawmen from Judy lately. It is frankly shocking to see such a good scientist take that kind of a turn to sloppy thinking. I have no explanation for it." -Steven Schneider http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101101/full/news.2010.577.html http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101101/full/news.2010.577.ht...
      - Chris2048 10y ago
        I didn't name them; but I already commented on the nature of "influence". > you and misterman are parroting I didn't parrot anything, try reading my posts. > "We've seen a lot of strawmen from Judy lately." And what has Judith said about Steve?

mistermann 10y ago

> So why do people trust the dissenting scientists? That's a great question. At least for myself, I don't immediately trust her (why would I without reading a substantial part of her work) - it is that when someone asks obviously informed questions, and answers are refused, I assume the person being asked the question is lying. In the youtube video, the senator is very clearing presenting himself as being far more informed on the topic than he is. He is (perhaps unknowingly) being dishonest, so I trust her more.

DonHopkins 10y ago
Since you're so adept at deciding who to trust and judging people's honesty by watching their facial expressions and body language on television, what do you have to say about Judith Curry blinking continuously at 85 blinks per minute during this FOX News interview? https://youtu.be/g5LpwL4NKbw https://youtu.be/g5LpwL4NKbw Do you trust what this guy says about blinking and lying? https://youtu.be/HiTbd4Mc3kk https://youtu.be/HiTbd4Mc3kk Have you ever read and listened to the words she's actually written and said? Or did you only listen to Tucker Carlson's leading questions and slanted innuendo while interviewing her on FOX News? And how much do you think they're paying her to come on the show and stare into the camera and lie while blinking at 85 BPM? She directly contradicts your claims (and her own) in her own words: "Nobody and certainly not myself is claiming that I am persecuted or there is a plot that is out to get me." -Judith Curry http://www.keithkloor.com/?p=3734 http://www.keithkloor.com/?p=3734 -- you're the one who's incorrectly claiming that she was somehow "silenced". The late great Stephen Schneider said: "So they make this assertion that they’re being systematically excluded, because they have no other argument, they no have evidence for the assertion. Let them do a study. Let them show us the letters of all the papers that have been rejected. What we did is look at real evidence, independently collected: How many papers, and how many citations. That’s independent, and the only way you can claim it isn’t true is to invoke some massive conspiracy that is frankly laughable." -Stephen Schneider https://thinkprogress.org/interview-with-scientist-stephen-schneider-on-his-expert-credibility-in-climate-change-study-d927e9428157#.ruyiz93rz https://thinkprogress.org/interview-with-scientist-stephen-s... So show us your evidence. Give us the names of scientists who have been silenced, or retract your false claim and conspiracy theory. But there is no doubt: Judith Curry is most certainly not one of those silenced scientists you hypothesize. And remember what Stephen Schneider also said: "We've seen a lot of strawmen from Judy lately. It is frankly shocking to see such a good scientist take that kind of a turn to sloppy thinking. I have no explanation for it." -Steven Schneider http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101101/full/news.2010.577.html http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101101/full/news.2010.577.ht...
- Chris2048 10y ago
  > Give us the names of scientists who have been silenced "hear, hear, tell us what it sounded like, this tree that fell in the woods while no one was around!"
  - DonHopkins 10y ago
    So the one person you named wasn't silenced, you don't know any more names, and don't have any other evidence to support your claim, so therefore your conspiracy theory is that it's impossible to even know them, but they exist anyway. You've just proven my point. The late Stephen Schneider also made the same point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Schneider https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Schneider "So they make this assertion that they’re being systematically excluded, because they have no other argument, they no have evidence for the assertion. Let them do a study. Let them show us the letters of all the papers that have been rejected. What we did is look at real evidence, independently collected: How many papers, and how many citations. That’s independent, and the only way you can claim it isn’t true is to invoke some massive conspiracy that is frankly laughable." -Stephen Schneider https://thinkprogress.org/interview-with-scientist-stephen-schneider-on-his-expert-credibility-in-climate-change-study-d927e9428157 https://thinkprogress.org/interview-with-scientist-stephen-s... And remember what Stephen Schneider also said about the person whose words and conspiracy theories you and misterman are parroting: "We've seen a lot of strawmen from Judy lately. It is frankly shocking to see such a good scientist take that kind of a turn to sloppy thinking. I have no explanation for it." -Steven Schneider http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101101/full/news.2010.577.html http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101101/full/news.2010.577.ht...
    - Chris2048 10y ago
      I didn't name them; but I already commented on the nature of "influence". > you and misterman are parroting I didn't parrot anything, try reading my posts. > "We've seen a lot of strawmen from Judy lately." And what has Judith said about Steve?