Australian Politics Forum - global warming once again found to be flawed

Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register

Forum rules, Recent posts (with text), RSS, Search options, Browse all uploaded images
Home, Articles, Green Tax Shift, Evolution,

Australian Politics Forum › General Discussion › Thinking Globally › global warming once again found to be flawed

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Pages: 1 2

global warming once again found to be flawed (Read 2915 times)

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 53188 At my desk.	Re: global warming once again found to be flawed Reply #15 - Jan 29^th, 2010 at 9:54pm So whether a paper is scientific depends on the motiviation of the authors? Let me get this straight, you think that scientists are traditionally lacking in political motives and that this report breaks the trend?
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: global warming once again found to be flawed
Reply #16 - Jan 29^th, 2010 at 10:24pm

freediver wrote on Jan 29^th, 2010 at 9:54pm:

So whether a paper is scientific depends on the motiviation of the authors?

Let me get this straight, you think that scientists are traditionally lacking in political motives and that this report breaks the trend?

Fd, with great respect, you have a peculiarly great difficulty with getting anything straight.

Scientists working in the physical sciences should have no political motives when designing, conducting and evaluating their research. If they do, they are acting unethically and unscientifically.

The words 'Intergovernmental Panel' should alert even the most sluggish minds to the defining tenor of these reports.

Even independent labs and university research centres are prone to group think and listening out for their master' voice, although they tend to be ashamed when caught at it. Government functionaries, on the other hand, are prized for that very ability.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 53188
At my desk.

Re: global warming once again found to be flawed
Reply #17 - Jan 30^th, 2010 at 12:15pm

You have an extremely naive view of science Soren. It is riddled with politics and group think. Without that, it couldn't function, or deliver the great advances in knowledge that it has.

Whether something has political ramifications has absolutely no impact on whether it is scientific. Nor does the motive of the researcher. Imagine of someone claimed that the theory of evolution was unscientific merely because it had political ramifications. Or that Galileo's theory's were unscientific because powerful found them disturbing. That is basically what you are saying.

This is why I asked you what makes a paper scientific. You can't seem to answer that, even though you are certain that this particular one is not scientific.

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: global warming once again found to be flawed
Reply #18 - Jan 30^th, 2010 at 12:37pm

[quote author=freediver link=1264375062/15#17 date=1264817707]You have an extremely naive view of science Soren. It is riddled with politics and group think. Without that, it couldn't function, or deliver the great advances in knowledge that it has.

Whether something has political ramifications has absolutely no impact on whether it is scientific. Nor does the motive of the researcher. Imagine of someone claimed that the theory of evolution was unscientific merely because it had political ramifications. Or that Galileo's theory's were unscientific because powerful found them disturbing. That is basically what you are saying.['quote]
Nothing of the sort.

You are mixing thing up in manner peculiar to your own mind. You are like Alice.

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 53188 At my desk.	Re: global warming once again found to be flawed Reply #19 - Jan 30^th, 2010 at 12:50pm What makes a document scientific?
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

Soren Gold Member Offline Posts: 25654 Gender:	Re: global warming once again found to be flawed Reply #20 - Jan 30^th, 2010 at 3:01pm freediver wrote on Jan 30^th, 2010 at 12:50pm: What makes a document scientific? The application of the scientific method. What is that, then? http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&rlz=1T4GZEZ_en___AU345&q=define%3Ascientif...
Back to top	IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 53188 At my desk.	Re: global warming once again found to be flawed Reply #21 - Jan 30^th, 2010 at 3:12pm So if they subject the document to those methods it becomes scientific?
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: global warming once again found to be flawed
Reply #22 - Jan 30^th, 2010 at 3:47pm

Soren wrote on Jan 29^th, 2010 at 8:37am:

muso wrote on Jan 29^th, 2010 at 7:48am:

Ok, you can have a strong opinion. That's fine, but you made a statement of alleged fact, but were deliberately vague in telling us which report you meant. Now is your opportunity to clear that up.

The IPCC Assessment Reports

OK, so let's take the AR5 assessment reports. They are in preparation at the moment. There are several Working Groups involved. Here is the link for WG1:

http://www.ipcc-wg1.unibe.ch/

As you can see, it says :

Quote:

Governments and participating organisations are invited to nominate experts to participate in the preparation of the three Working Group contributions to the Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) as coordinating lead authors, authors and review editors. Click here to access the IPCC AR5 Nominations Portal, which routes IPCC Focal Points and representatives of participating organisations to the individual working group nomination pages.

Now who do you suppose those lead authors, authors and review editors might be?

Al Gore? or just maybe, scientists who are experts in their field?

Have to actually checked the IPCC AR4 assessment reports yet to find out who wrote them? (it wasn't Al Gore either)

So just what is your source for saying that the reports are not written by scientists? Wayne's Climate World?

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

Pages: 1 2

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

« Forum

‹ Board

Top of this page