3 ms·

I think you’re entering tinfoil hat territory here. Catastrophic climate doomers will get more clicks/citations/panels than moderates than skeptics. “The worl

I think you’re entering tinfoil hat territory here. Catastrophic climate doomers will get more clicks/citations/panels than moderates than skeptics. “The world is ending we must act now” is a whole lot more attractive than “there are concerns but they are manageable” which is more attractive than “climatology isn’t actually science because it isn’t falsifiable and there’s a lot of contradicting models built by equally qualified people and we should avoid only listening to the most dramatic ones and try and do actual science when possible and be wary of dogma.” No one’s funding that for more research!

defrost 3y ago
> I think you’re entering tinfoil hat territory here. What, specifically, do you regard in my comment as "tinfoil hat" ? ( eg: my remarks about ocean tempreture data acquisition are supported here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_California_Division_of_War_Research https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_California_Divis... ) I've worked four decades in exploration geophysics on global scale surveys of entire countries and I've met a number of my predecessors that worked on ocean tempreture data aquisition and atmospheric sampling. The larger data aquisition surveys are not undertaken at the behest of "Catastrophic climate doomers" - they are funded by deep pockets that can sustain a burn rate of often a million+ USD per day (sub sea seismic modelling, satellite constellations, etc). The data aquired shows that global climate is changing in a manner consistent with the physics first discussed a century ago.