The disaster that would ensue after the elimination of democracy ought to be taken much more into consideration. The proponents of a soft totalitarianism refuse to factor that in. Like their climate models, they ignore too much.
The first step on the path to wisdom is the recognition of our own ignorance (and fallibility). These climate scientists seeking totalitarian control are afflicted with a hubris which boggles the mind.
Especially given the extraordinary level of incompetence which underlies so much of their science. Perhaps they could invest some of their attention on siting and calibrating thermometers properly. They might want to figure out how to take the temperature without screwing it up before they lecture us on our political shortcomings.
Children learn in grade school to show their work. And the need to check it for accuracy. [aka transparency and replication] It might be nice for climate scientists to focus on raising the quality of their work up to grade school standards before they preach at us about what must be done. They might have more credibility.
"Especially given the extraordinary level of incompetence which underlies so much of their science." I'm not sure I'd call it incompetence. A clever accountant can make losses look like profits, or vice versa. However, tax authorities or Exchange Authorities don't accept nifty "tricks" as explanations. No. These guys are very competent when it comes crunching numbers and drawing graphs. No doubt about it.
The participants of KLIMAZWIEBEL are made of a diverse group of people interested in the climate issue; among them people, who consider the man-made climate change explanation as true, and others, who consider this explanation false. We have scientists and lay people; natural scientists and social scientists. People with different cultural and professional backgrounds. This is a unique resource for a relevant and inspiring discussion. This resource needs sustainable management by everybody. Therefore we ask to pay attention to these rules:
1. We do not want to see insults, ad hominem comments, lengthy tirades, ongoing repetitions, forms of disrepect to opponents. Also lengthy presentation of amateur-theories are not welcomed. When violating these rules, postings will be deleted. 2. Please limit your contributions to the issues of the different threads. 3. Please give your name or use an alias - comments from "anonymous" should be avoided. 4. When you feel yourself provoked, please restrain from ranting; instead try to delay your response for a couple of hours, when your anger has evaporated somewhat. 5. If you wan to submit a posting (begin a new thread), send it to either Eduardo Zorita or Hans von Storch - we publish it within short time. But please, only articles related to climate science and climate policy. 6. Use whatever language you want. But maybe not a language which is rarely understood in Hamburg.
Interviews with climate scientists by Hans von Storch
Hans von Storch is doing two series of interviews with eminent climate scientists, who are interesting but not necessarily famous or known to the public. The relatively short interviews are published
3 comments:
The disaster that would ensue after the elimination of democracy ought to be taken much more into consideration. The proponents of a soft totalitarianism refuse to factor that in. Like their climate models, they ignore too much.
The first step on the path to wisdom is the recognition of our own ignorance (and fallibility). These climate scientists seeking totalitarian control are afflicted with a hubris which boggles the mind.
Especially given the extraordinary level of incompetence which underlies so much of their science. Perhaps they could invest some of their attention on siting and calibrating thermometers properly. They might want to figure out how to take the temperature without screwing it up before they lecture us on our political shortcomings.
Children learn in grade school to show their work. And the need to check it for accuracy. [aka transparency and replication] It might be nice for climate scientists to focus on raising the quality of their work up to grade school standards before they preach at us about what must be done. They might have more credibility.
"Especially given the extraordinary level of incompetence which underlies so much of their science."
I'm not sure I'd call it incompetence. A clever accountant can make losses look like profits, or vice versa. However, tax authorities or Exchange Authorities don't accept nifty "tricks" as explanations.
No. These guys are very competent when it comes crunching numbers and drawing graphs. No doubt about it.
Post a Comment (pop-up window,non-moderated)