3 ms·
Did you choose to take Judith Curry's word It's telling that you twisted what I said in that way. I don't take her word any more than I take Mann's word. I r
by crusso 13y ago
Did you choose to take Judith Curry's word
It's telling that you twisted what I said in that way. I don't take her word any more than I take Mann's word. I read a variety of sources and try to reason about them to create my own world view.
Since I don't have an oil well in my backyard, I don't really have a dog in the fight besides my general interest in the "success" of our society.
I really don't spend enough brain cells to understand the issues as well as the climate scientists, but I am good/have relevant experience in two important ways.
1. I've worked with simulation enough to know that they aren't worth crap if they don't have a track record for predicting reality. Climate models have had no appreciable success at predicting long range climate. As much as you may want to, you can't put the cart before the horse. The validity of the model has to be proved before they can be trusted. Before that happens, you're using religious thinking and trying to label those who don't agree with you heretics.
2. I'm good at spotting bullshit politics masked as scientific authority. I've found the IPCC, Mann, et al. to be extremely political in their approach to Science. They trash people who don't agree with them and they don't just admit it when they and their models are significantly wrong.
- scarmig 13y ago"Bullshit politics" "crap" Keep it civil. You clearly privilege Judith Curry's work over the rest of the scientific community; and even if you gave them equal billing, that'd be inappropriate, simply because she's significantly outnumbered. And her skepticism is always expressed in political forums, never scientific ones, which further takes away from how much scientific credibility she has, at least when it comes to her AGW denialism. 2) is, naturally, an argument from "climate science is bunk because climate scientists are evil because crusso is an expert at saying climate scientists are evil," which is unfortunately a common logical error.
- moheeb 13y ago""crap"" is pretty civil. I pick up my dog's every day just to keep our neighborhood civil.
- crusso 13y agoKeep it civil. Seems like you're trying to augment your argument by asserting some sort of language dominance. Do you find that helps with other people? You clearly privilege Judith Curry's work over the rest of the scientific community Her work? Partially. I prefer her calm approach to Science that demands evidence and remains skeptical vs the all-too-often politically-driven one I see at the IPCC. That said, I read realclimate about as often as I read Curry's blog. she's significantly outnumbered Yeah, I'm significantly outnumbered by Miley Cyrus fans too. What of it? crusso is an expert at saying climate scientists are evil At the end of the day, we can't all understand everything. Lacking models that reflect reality, this is all just guesswork - so I'd prefer to rely on my understanding of what makes good Science.
- scarmig 13y agoSeems like you're trying to augment your argument Yes, it is. When someone's getting emotional about a topic, particularly a scientific one, it's useful to point it out, to rhetorically place yourself on the side of scientific, rational debate. You do the same thing one line down when you emphasize how much you prefer her "calm approach to Science." Her work Which work? Is it her scientific papers you respect, or her publicizing the evils of other scientists? outnumbered by Miley Cyrus fans too Miley Cyrus is great. But are you comparing the entirety of the climate science community to fans of a particular pop singer, when it comes to judging scientific credibility?
- crusso 13y agoentirety of the climate science community That's the point, though, isn't it? It's not the entirety of the climate Science community.