3 ms·

so no need to troll Identify where I was trolling please. i think many people need to be reminded that whenever we talk of "consensus" we talk of politics and

so no need to troll Identify where I was trolling please. i think many people need to be reminded that whenever we talk of "consensus" we talk of politics and not science. That's a red herring. It's a common tactic for those who disagree with a prevailing scientific idea to dismissively chide scientists as playing politics, as if the scientific consensus emerged from political donations instead of from conclusions based on data. Consensus does not imply unanimity or even that the data is correct, but it's only in climate science that we see people actively fight the broad conclusions of the scientific community as a whole.

jpwagner 13y ago
Anywhere policy decisions are made, it is practical to vote on alternatives. This is where the "consensus" is justified. The rest of your conspiracy crap has no place here. You are hung-up on a subpopulation that is likely not even on HN.
- vectorpush 13y ago
  The rest of your conspiracy crap has no place here. You are hung-up on a subpopulation that is likely not even on HN. Where in any of my responses have I said anything about a conspiracy? It seems as if you're the one who is hung up on an ideology you're trying to inject into my argument. Anywhere policy decisions are made, it is practical to vote on alternatives. This is where the "consensus" is justified. Try not to interpret this as trolling but, I don't disagree with this statement. What is your point here?
  - jpwagner 13y ago
    "Where in any of my responses have I said anything about a conspiracy?" as if the scientific consensus emerged from political donations... ...it's only in climate science that we see people actively fight the broad conclusions of the scientific community as a whole.
    - vectorpush 13y ago
      Friend, you're stretching the definition of conspiracy quite a bit here. At the very least, a conspiracy theory would require some accusation of collusion between some parties. There is no secret plan, I'm just pointing out a common rhetorical tactic I disagree with.

jpwagner 13y ago

Anywhere policy decisions are made, it is practical to vote on alternatives. This is where the "consensus" is justified. The rest of your conspiracy crap has no place here. You are hung-up on a subpopulation that is likely not even on HN.

vectorpush 13y ago
The rest of your conspiracy crap has no place here. You are hung-up on a subpopulation that is likely not even on HN. Where in any of my responses have I said anything about a conspiracy? It seems as if you're the one who is hung up on an ideology you're trying to inject into my argument. Anywhere policy decisions are made, it is practical to vote on alternatives. This is where the "consensus" is justified. Try not to interpret this as trolling but, I don't disagree with this statement. What is your point here?
- jpwagner 13y ago
  "Where in any of my responses have I said anything about a conspiracy?" as if the scientific consensus emerged from political donations... ...it's only in climate science that we see people actively fight the broad conclusions of the scientific community as a whole.
  - vectorpush 13y ago
    Friend, you're stretching the definition of conspiracy quite a bit here. At the very least, a conspiracy theory would require some accusation of collusion between some parties. There is no secret plan, I'm just pointing out a common rhetorical tactic I disagree with.