4 ms·

This is mindboggling anti-intellectualism. There is absolutely zero substance to your claim. Scientific work is more rigorous and quantitative than ever, especi

This is mindboggling anti-intellectualism. There is absolutely zero substance to your claim. Scientific work is more rigorous and quantitative than ever, especially in climate science, and the fact that you are too lazy to learn the first thing about how modern science works doesn't change that reality. All I can say is I'd really, really wish that you'd educate yourself on how science works. Please start by reading some scientific journals, Nature Geoscience and Geophysical Research Letters are a good place to start.

esaym 9y ago
Why? So I can see more pretty charts and cartoons? I'm am not telling you my option, I am telling you my observation.
- Oletros 9y ago
  Then the problem is perhaps that you cannot read the data and understand what is behind those charts
- tstactplsignore 9y ago
  So you can learn something about scientific findings. Their texts are quite thorough, and the data is there- it bewilders me why you're complaining about a figure for every 1000 words of text (normal ratio for a scientific paper). I don't think it's your opinion, or your observation- just some raw emotional feeling born out of a dislike for science and the people who do it. I will try to engage with you. Here is a typical paper from Nature Climate Change this week. Can you explain exactly why you think the text has not enough substance and is overly reliant upon figures? https://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate3351.html https://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/n...
kbenson 9y ago
This isn't an effective way to engage with and change someone's point of view, and there's plenty of science on that. It may be intellectually satisfying to you personally, but that's no better than what you are denigrating here. If you actually care about the cause you profess to be for with your actions, please find a different way to express it, lest you hurt while trying to help.
- anigbrowl 9y ago
  Why? I don't know whether the person in question is trolling or not, but the stated unwillingness to study the data pretty much disqualifies any value that person's opinion might have. Expecting advocates of good environmental policy to convince every last intellectual holdout (who may or may not be sincere) is unreasonable. It's like demanding that NASA get buy-in from the flat earth crowd.
  - kbenson 9y ago
    Because stating observations, whether true or not, isn't always an effective way forward. I was working under the assumption that the response was intended for the original commenter, which may have been assuming too much, but when it can be summarized neatly as "You're wrong. Your whole way of looking at this is wrong. Everyone else is right, and you need to just accept it." but with different words, I think it's not effective at engaging with that person. I think that the recipient of that might feel less inclined to accept an alternative point of view if that's how the interaction starts.
    - anigbrowl 9y ago
      There is no effective way forward with someone who insists that they're unwilling to be persuaded.
      - kbenson 9y ago
        I don't think that's what we have here. We have someone that's not persuaded by what they've seen. Has anyone asked why? Even if someone is wrong, that doesn't mean they don't have something important to contribute. I'm just sad the the first response wasn't something along the lines of: "Why? What does the graphic being a cartoon have to do with how accurate the data and the point it's trying to express is? Why are your experiences in a specific region supposed to map directly towards the overall global scenario? Why are you using hottest days in summer in your observation instead of total hot days, which is actually what's being discussed, since it's possible for the average to be much hotter, even if the largest outlier isn't as high for that year, right?"

esaym 9y ago

Why? So I can see more pretty charts and cartoons? I'm am not telling you my option, I am telling you my observation.

Oletros 9y ago
Then the problem is perhaps that you cannot read the data and understand what is behind those charts
tstactplsignore 9y ago
So you can learn something about scientific findings. Their texts are quite thorough, and the data is there- it bewilders me why you're complaining about a figure for every 1000 words of text (normal ratio for a scientific paper). I don't think it's your opinion, or your observation- just some raw emotional feeling born out of a dislike for science and the people who do it. I will try to engage with you. Here is a typical paper from Nature Climate Change this week. Can you explain exactly why you think the text has not enough substance and is overly reliant upon figures? https://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate3351.html https://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/n...

kbenson 9y ago

This isn't an effective way to engage with and change someone's point of view, and there's plenty of science on that. It may be intellectually satisfying to you personally, but that's no better than what you are denigrating here. If you actually care about the cause you profess to be for with your actions, please find a different way to express it, lest you hurt while trying to help.

anigbrowl 9y ago
Why? I don't know whether the person in question is trolling or not, but the stated unwillingness to study the data pretty much disqualifies any value that person's opinion might have. Expecting advocates of good environmental policy to convince every last intellectual holdout (who may or may not be sincere) is unreasonable. It's like demanding that NASA get buy-in from the flat earth crowd.
- kbenson 9y ago
  Because stating observations, whether true or not, isn't always an effective way forward. I was working under the assumption that the response was intended for the original commenter, which may have been assuming too much, but when it can be summarized neatly as "You're wrong. Your whole way of looking at this is wrong. Everyone else is right, and you need to just accept it." but with different words, I think it's not effective at engaging with that person. I think that the recipient of that might feel less inclined to accept an alternative point of view if that's how the interaction starts.
  - anigbrowl 9y ago
    There is no effective way forward with someone who insists that they're unwilling to be persuaded.
    - kbenson 9y ago
      I don't think that's what we have here. We have someone that's not persuaded by what they've seen. Has anyone asked why? Even if someone is wrong, that doesn't mean they don't have something important to contribute. I'm just sad the the first response wasn't something along the lines of: "Why? What does the graphic being a cartoon have to do with how accurate the data and the point it's trying to express is? Why are your experiences in a specific region supposed to map directly towards the overall global scenario? Why are you using hottest days in summer in your observation instead of total hot days, which is actually what's being discussed, since it's possible for the average to be much hotter, even if the largest outlier isn't as high for that year, right?"