Skip to main content

Topic: "Scientists Say" blather (Read 41321 times)

"Scientists Say" blather
Are you, too, bothered by internet news reports that "scientists say" this or that. I find it utterly annoying. Who are these scientists? Are cosmologists qualified to say anything meaningful about high energy physics, biologists about the orbit of Enceladus?

What think you?

  • Frenzie
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Administrator
Re: "Scientists Say" blather
Reply #75
There was a claim about "indicators of a consensus" versus "disagreement". I automatically deduced that these things just don't go together.

Did we read the same sentence? I'm pretty sure it said something like "despite consensus among scientists, the public mistakenly seems to think there is disagreement." I wasn't aware that saying "the public" is wrong about something or other is terribly controversial. :P

The only Cook I know it's some English pirate that pretended to have discovered Australia.

He claimed that, did he? I thought everyone knew it was "discovered" by a Dutchman (if we discount the obvious previous discoverers in proud European tradition).

  • OakdaleFTL
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: "Scientists Say" blather
Reply #76
Any plans to get to the point?

Sigh. The point was made by what I said originally, which you then criticized (it now seems, for making a point)... I could "walk you through" my reasoning but, at the baby-steps you seem to require, it would take forever -- and there's no way I could avoid stepping on your toes.
Of course, since your only interest is in trying to trip me up, I shouldn't be so mindful of your toes! But although I can stoop to your level occasionally I can't stay there like you can...
________________________________________________________________
@Belfrager: Most people won't read original scientific papers, and fewer would understand them. Which is why it's so disheartening to find many "scientists" becoming activists, and adulterating (or worse...) their scientific output for political purposes.

The two Lewandowsky papers are ostensibly about motivated reasoning, which is deliciously ironic! Well, the links are posted; you can, if you choose, see for yourself.
I thought everyone knew [Australia] was "discovered" by a Dutchman (if we discount the obvious previous discoverers in proud European tradition).

If Cook and Lewandowsky are representative of Aussie scientists, better that it had been left to the aboriginals... :)
进行 ...
"Humor is emotional chaos remembered in tranquility." - James Thurber
No one listens to me as much as I do and even I have my limits...
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts!" - Richard Feynman

  • ersi
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: "Scientists Say" blather
Reply #77

There was a claim about "indicators of a consensus" versus "disagreement". I automatically deduced that these things just don't go together.

Did we read the same sentence? I'm pretty sure it said something like "despite consensus among scientists, the public mistakenly seems to think there is disagreement." I wasn't aware that saying "the public" is wrong about something or other is terribly controversial. :P

Hey, it was not worded this way. Re-reading it I see how you can interpret it this way - non-antagonistically - but the sentence was worded differently and, if you know Oakdale, he is on the side of either consensus or controversy, whereas the text really establishes neither consensus or controversy while it blathers about both consensus and controversy. Or was it disagreement.


Any plans to get to the point?

Sigh. The point was made by what I said originally, which you then criticized (it now seems, for making a point)... I could "walk you through" my reasoning but, at the baby-steps you seem to require, it would take forever -- and there's no way I could avoid stepping on your toes.
Of course, since your only interest is in trying to trip me up, I shouldn't be so mindful of your toes! But although I can stoop to your level occasionally I can't stay there like you can...

The point would be this: What do these studies establish, as per you? Do they establish either meaningful consensus or substantial disagreement? Do they exemplify poor science or do they prove that someone else's science is poor? Too hard to tell simple things like this?

  • OakdaleFTL
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: "Scientists Say" blather
Reply #78
Too hard to tell simple things like this?

Too hard to tell (some) simple-minded people anything...

The papers evidence poor grasp of statistical reasoning; poor scientific practices; an unconscionable predilection to polemics, rather than argumentation; and politicization of science that probably should be relevant to government policies.
What more can I say, to someone who couldn't even get through a single paragraph without stumbling? :) Either take my word for it or forget about it; or (shudder!) read and learn enough to decide for yourself!
进行 ...
"Humor is emotional chaos remembered in tranquility." - James Thurber
No one listens to me as much as I do and even I have my limits...
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts!" - Richard Feynman

  • ersi
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: "Scientists Say" blather
Reply #79

The papers evidence poor grasp of statistical reasoning; poor scientific practices; an unconscionable predilection to polemics, rather than argumentation; and politicization of science that probably should be relevant to government policies.

Finally you got to the list of sins and throwing stones that you should have done properly already in your first post. This was your entire point anyway.


What more can I say, to someone who couldn't even get through a single paragraph without stumbling? :) Either take my word for it or forget about it; or (shudder!) read and learn enough to decide for yourself!

I didn't know what to do with that paragraph. It didn't tell me anything new, interesting or even coherent. It still hasn't. Now that I have your impression of the papers, I have no idea how you got this impression (most likely it's some politics that you assume to be connected with the authors), but at least I know your impression.

Briefly, you think the papers are blather, while to me it's curious how you overexpose yourself to blather and still manage to react to it, producing lots of blather in the process, mixed attempts to hide your true impression, trying to provoke it in others before you reveal yourself. Why not read something uplifting for a while?

  • OakdaleFTL
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: "Scientists Say" blather
Reply #80
There's a bright side (sort-of) to research of this sort:
Examining the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change, gets it much better! But goes "off the rails" in its conclusion...
Quote
It seems that the debate on the authenticity of global warming and the role played by human activity is largely nonexistent among those who understand the nuances and scientifc basis of long-term climate processes. The challenge, rather, appears  to be how to effectively communicate this fact to policy makers and to a public that continues to mistakenly perceive debate among scientists.

Doran, Peter, and Maggie Zimmerman. "Examining the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change." Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union (2009)
The two questions it asked respondents were


       
  • When compared with pre-1800s levels, do you think that mean global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant?

  •    
  • Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?


Is the "problem" with characterizing the consensus thusly evident to all? If not, let me give you my take...


The first is a "gimme"... Fairly reliable records exist! (So, why was it asked? :) ) Why -of course- to set up the second, and its sleight-of-hand conclusion!
What, precisely, does "a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperature" mean? Atmospheric CO2 concentrations? Methane? All "greenhouse gasses"...?
Land usage? Management of fisheries?


In short, the questions don't address what advocates and advocate/scientists insist is the problem.


(This paper was cited by Cook, et.al., too... Perhaps he should have read it, himself? :) But maybe the abstract only gave the "results and conclusions"... Is such really Science, by today's standards?)

进行 ...
"Humor is emotional chaos remembered in tranquility." - James Thurber
No one listens to me as much as I do and even I have my limits...
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts!" - Richard Feynman

  • ersi
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: "Scientists Say" blather
Reply #81

In short, the questions don't address what advocates and advocate/scientists insist is the problem.

What do advocates insist is the problem?

  • OakdaleFTL
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: "Scientists Say" blather
Reply #82
Briefly, you think the papers are blather, while to me it's curious how you overexpose yourself to blather and still manage to react to it, producing lots of blather in the process, mixed attempts to hide your true impression, trying to provoke it in others before you reveal yourself. Why not read something uplifting for a while?

Jeez!
--------------------------------------------------------
So, what do you think of the Montreal Protocol, now? Is someone cheating or was the science flawed...? Do you care?

p.s.,
I read (re-read) my favorite poets and novelists regularly; and sample new stuff fairly often... And I even read the bizarre posts by a certain Estonian of my acquaintance... What more does one need? :)
But, of course, there's more: Certain classics of logic and set theory, probability theory and statistical reasoning, philosophy of science; and some few websites geared to such...

BTW: Thanks for the tip about thelogician.net! I've just begun his Future Logic, which should be a lot of fun!
  • Last Edit: 2014-08-24, 06:14:39 by OakdaleFTL
进行 ...
"Humor is emotional chaos remembered in tranquility." - James Thurber
No one listens to me as much as I do and even I have my limits...
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts!" - Richard Feynman

  • OakdaleFTL
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: "Scientists Say" blather
Reply #83
What do advocates insist is the problem?

First, let me say -on behalf of the humans: Welcome to Planet Earth!

Advocates insist the problem is our carbon-intensive energy economies. (And, owing to the "selfish" ways of us humans, over-population...) Something must be done!
进行 ...
"Humor is emotional chaos remembered in tranquility." - James Thurber
No one listens to me as much as I do and even I have my limits...
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts!" - Richard Feynman

  • ersi
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: "Scientists Say" blather
Reply #84

So, what do you think of the Montreal Protocol, now? Is someone cheating or was the science flawed...? Do you care?

I think of the Montreal Protocol the same as of the Kyoto Protocol: It didn't get done. It didn't formulate objectives and commitments properly. And as I have been saying, whenever one says "global warming" one is not even getting the problem properly and is unlikely to provide the right scientific solution.

But the protocols are not a scientific failure. The protocols are a failure of politics. There's no political consensus on the science, because serious scientists see many good reasons not to corrupt themselves with politics. That's why there's hardly any science in the protocols and it's unlikely to ever get there.

As to if I care... I see the problem, but it's not my personal problem. Not up to me to make myself heard on a topic not in my field of expertise. I will provide my solutions when directly asked, but nobody cares to ask, so why should I care? 


BTW: Thanks for the tip about thelogician.net! I've just begun his Future Logic, which should be a lot of fun!

You welcome. Enjoy.


Advocates insist the problem is our carbon-intensive energy economies. (And, owing to the "selfish" ways of us humans, over-population...) Something must be done!

And your response to it?

(from least likely to most likely: 1. "There's no such problem, and here's why..." 2. "Yes, there's a problem of the nature you describe, but nothing must be done!" 3. "Blather blather blather...")

  • OakdaleFTL
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: "Scientists Say" blather
Reply #85
I think of the Montreal Protocol the same as of the Kyoto Protocol: It didn't get done. It didn't formulate objectives and commitments properly.

Ah -- let me stop you right there: You said quite recently that it was a model of good and effective environmental regulation; that it did, indeed, both "get done" and get done what was intended!
进行 ...
"Humor is emotional chaos remembered in tranquility." - James Thurber
No one listens to me as much as I do and even I have my limits...
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts!" - Richard Feynman

  • ersi
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: "Scientists Say" blather
Reply #86

I think of the Montreal Protocol the same as of the Kyoto Protocol: It didn't get done. It didn't formulate objectives and commitments properly.

Ah -- let me stop you right there: You said quite recently that it was a model of good and effective environmental regulation; that it did, indeed, both "get done" and get done what was intended!

Right. I misremembered. I thought the Montreal Protocol was another global warming protocol a la Kyoto. There are so many protocols to remember. My main concern is the secret protocols of MRP.

The ozone depletion conferences went much better politically and scientifically than the current global warming conferences are going. This would be what I meant.

  • OakdaleFTL
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: "Scientists Say" blather
Reply #87
And your response to it?

(I don't do your type of multiple-choice survey...) I'd say that the science does not implicate carbon-intensive economies in a catastrophic (i.e., "tipping-point") climactic response. But that it both behooves us to develop alternatives and continue research... The science should certainly continue; but we should not jeopardize our economies for the sake of unfounded implications.
And we certainly (and morally) can't ask developing economies to forgo their development!
进行 ...
"Humor is emotional chaos remembered in tranquility." - James Thurber
No one listens to me as much as I do and even I have my limits...
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts!" - Richard Feynman

  • Frenzie
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Administrator
Re: "Scientists Say" blather
Reply #88
the text really establishes neither consensus or controversy while it blathers about both consensus and controversy. Or was it disagreement.

I can't quite argue with that. :lol: (Except to say that some boring blather is a requirement: after all, it should be established what you're researching, as well as how and why. But I wouldn't call the text appealing.)

  • Belfrager
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: "Scientists Say" blather
Reply #89
The science should certainly continue; but we should not jeopardize our economies for the sake of unfounded implications.

What you call "our economies" means only the private interests of a dozen companies based at fossil fuels.
Many countries in Europe have already shown how it is perfectly possible to change to sustainable energy without any adverse effects on economics very much the contrary.
And we certainly (and morally) can't ask developing economies to forgo their development!

That's the problem and the true reason why the USA are so adverse to the evidence about climate change.
Someone would have to pay those economies and no one wants to do it. The "moral" you mention consists on exploiting them not to pay for them to jump to a modern energetic model.
A matter of attitude.

  • OakdaleFTL
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: "Scientists Say" blather
Reply #90
There are so many protocols to remember. My main concern is the secret protocols of MRP.

Ilya Somin, over at my favorite Law Blog -- the Volokh Conspiracy, this morning had a good piece on the 75th Anniversary...
Yes, I agree, it's more important to remember MRP. (And shudder and weep, and remain aware that "Never again!" is not the exclusive property of the Jews... But that was the past. Right?! :( )
I can't help it: I distrust Putin...


[I have to go out for a smoke... Back shortly.]
[edit:] Although I'd hit Send, others were posting while I was typing... Did y'all miss me while I was gone? :)
进行 ...
"Humor is emotional chaos remembered in tranquility." - James Thurber
No one listens to me as much as I do and even I have my limits...
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts!" - Richard Feynman

  • OakdaleFTL
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: "Scientists Say" blather
Reply #91
What you call "our economies" means only the private interests of a dozen companies based at fossil fuels.
Many countries in Europe have already shown how it is perfectly possible to change to sustainable energy without any adverse effects on economics very much the contrary.

Balderdash!
That's the problem and the true reason why the USA are so adverse to the evidence about climate change.
Someone would have to pay those economies and no one wants to do it. The "moral" you mention consists on exploiting them not to pay for them to jump to a modern energetic model.

Spoken like a true ex-Colonialist, sir!

But I've perused most of the "compelling" science and found it to be -shall we say- less than compelling? :)
The most evidence for "tipping-points"/runaway climate change (call it what you will) is in the scenarios provided by physical models -- which, so far, show little skill:
If the predictive skill of your model is poor, your model is false!
--------------------------------------------------
And the Precautionary Principle would preclude itself, if one cared to apply it...

But we're getting off-track, again! (Isn't there a CAGW thread here, somewhere? :) )
  • Last Edit: 2014-08-24, 08:08:44 by OakdaleFTL
进行 ...
"Humor is emotional chaos remembered in tranquility." - James Thurber
No one listens to me as much as I do and even I have my limits...
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts!" - Richard Feynman

Re: "Scientists Say" blather
Reply #92

With folks like  Sang, everything is political -- so --

You'll notice that politicians never say "everything is political" -- so--

  • OakdaleFTL
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: "Scientists Say" blather
Reply #93
Jimbro, you had to go back to page one of four to find that... But Sang is in the habit of insulting those with whom he disagrees. He's certainly in the habit of insulting me.
But -as you'll recall?- Sang was a fan of "motivated reasoning" studies, way back when. At least, when he could chortle along with the authors, journalists and others who shared his political views. Because, of course, not being a political progressive is akin to mental deficiency! QED.


Do you believe he's changed? :) (I'd welcome evidence of it, if he has...)
进行 ...
"Humor is emotional chaos remembered in tranquility." - James Thurber
No one listens to me as much as I do and even I have my limits...
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts!" - Richard Feynman

Re: "Scientists Say" blather
Reply #94
He's certainly in the habit of insulting me.

You poor thing, being bitten after you said "Translation: "OakdaleFTL didn't cite the Huffington Post, so he can't know what's what! Ipso facto... Ya know?" " My ass shed a tear for you.

  • OakdaleFTL
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: "Scientists Say" blather
Reply #95
Nope. You haven't changed, Sang... And you still think it's okay to be, well, what you are: Partisan, first and foremost.
Incompetent, else-wise.
进行 ...
"Humor is emotional chaos remembered in tranquility." - James Thurber
No one listens to me as much as I do and even I have my limits...
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts!" - Richard Feynman

  • OakdaleFTL
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: "Scientists Say" blather
Reply #96
A new post at Judith Curry's site might be of interest...
进行 ...
"Humor is emotional chaos remembered in tranquility." - James Thurber
No one listens to me as much as I do and even I have my limits...
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts!" - Richard Feynman

  • ersi
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: "Scientists Say" blather
Reply #97



  • jseaton2311
  • [*][*][*][*]
Re: "Scientists Say" blather
Reply #98
I don't give a f*ck about consensus, Cooks and whatever. Knowing what the scientists publishes it's the only way of knowing what actual science has to say about climate change.
All the rest it's pure shit.


Agreed.  Blather is pretty much anything one doesn't like or agree with--comment on blather is simply adding burble to the blather.  People everywhere blather, burble and blabber on and on, surely it must be an adaptive trait, for if there is enough blather, burble and blabber--someone is bound to hit on the truth.   :knight:  :cheers:
James J

  • OakdaleFTL
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: "Scientists Say" blather
Reply #99
Would you agree, James, that a physical model whose predictions fail is -essentially- wrong?
进行 ...
"Humor is emotional chaos remembered in tranquility." - James Thurber
No one listens to me as much as I do and even I have my limits...
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts!" - Richard Feynman