Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
pud
climber
Sportbikeville & Yucca brevifolia
|
|
|
Jan 11, 2017 - 07:07am PT
|
How to separate climate science from political correctness in the minds of large numbers of average Americans.
Condescending is the current game plan of the GW alarmists. I hope they stick with it.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Jan 11, 2017 - 09:21am PT
|
Condescending is the current game plan of the GW alarmists.
interesting take on it... if you decide you will not listen to a scientific explanation, and the person explaining that science to you doesn't back off their claim that you don't know what you are talking about, you could define that as an attitude of arrogance by a condescending elite class.
Of course scientists by the nature of their success in their fields are "elite," they have succeeded in mastering that field at a very high level.
Are you suggesting that they don't point out arguments that are scientifically wrong?
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
|
Jan 11, 2017 - 03:18pm PT
|
Whatever Lysenko.^^^^^
|
|
pud
climber
Sportbikeville & Yucca brevifolia
|
|
|
Jan 11, 2017 - 04:11pm PT
|
Of course scientists by the nature of their success in their fields are "elite," they have succeeded in mastering that field at a very high level.
Are you suggesting that they don't point out arguments that are scientifically wrong?
Just keep believing how elite you are Ed.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Jan 11, 2017 - 05:21pm PT
|
Jesus Christ...you're butt hurt because someone who knows what he is talking about is correcting you.
Free advice: there are people who know a lot more about things than you. Yes, there really are. You'd be wise to put aside your insecurities about elitism and listen up.
|
|
pud
climber
Sportbikeville & Yucca brevifolia
|
|
|
Jan 11, 2017 - 05:47pm PT
|
For Ed to believe every scientist is the best in their respective field(s) simply because they have a degree is wholly ignorant of the definition of the word "Elite"
Like I stated before. I think you, Ed and his ilk should continue to believe you are smarter than everyone else.
This strategy seems to be working fine for the rest of us.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Jan 11, 2017 - 09:02pm PT
|
For Ed to believe every scientist is the best in their respective field(s) simply because they have a degree is wholly ignorant of the definition of the word "Elite"
Like I stated before. I think you, Ed and his ilk should continue to believe you are smarter than everyone else.
This strategy seems to be working fine for the rest of us.
No, I'm not smarter than everyone else. That's why I listen: you should try it and learn something.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Jan 11, 2017 - 09:57pm PT
|
I really don't know how to respond to pud...
I am fine with someone like Tom Brady, or Stephen Curry, or David Price being athletes, elite in their sport, or with someone like Tommy Caldwell being elite in climbing, they demonstrate it by performing.
I am not saying that just because you have a degree you are smarter... (although those people seemed to be fairing in the current economy much better).
I am saying that the elite scientists are elite because they are better thinkers and doers in their fields.. they are smarter. You can object to that, take offense at that, deny that, but it is true, they are elite in the same sense the athletes are, and they put the time and effort, and are born with considerably positive attributes to be able to do that, and succeed in a very competitive field.
If you feel condescended on, it's your problem.
I don't think I am condescending here, certainly I engage in discussion, if I thought it was a waste of time and you weren't all worthy I'd go somewhere else... but if anyone says anything stupid, at least in my field, you get called out, a graduate student can to a professor, a researcher to a Nobel Prize winner, that status doesn't mean anything, what means something is your ideas, your work, your science.
If you are saying that some average Joe on the street understands climate science at the level that the scientists engaged in the effort understand it, then you are woefully misinformed, you are simply wrong.
That is not to say that that Joe couldn't understand it, and those scientists love to explain what they are doing... but really, if you go off on some bizarre rant like "it's the Sun" without thinking that those scientists already looked at that in tremendous detail, then you deserve to be chastised.
I am happy for you to decide that you want to keep putting CO2 in the atmosphere because it supports your lifestyle, knowing that it has a huge affect on the climate.
While China is now the largest emitter of CO2 into the atmosphere, the majority of the CO2 there is due to the USA and it's activities over this last half century. To a large extent, we have climate change because of the choices we made, perhaps unknowingly in the past, but now very evident.
We can decide that we're going to continue to do it whatever anyone else says.
But it will change the climate. You can't get out of that...
Oddly, the voices often proclaiming that we should take personal responsibility are the very same saying that there is not anthropogenic climate change. It is rather odd. Confronted with the fact that there is, and the realization that the USA has put the majority of it into the atmosphere, the reaction is to blame the scientists rather than taking personal responsibility.
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
|
Jan 11, 2017 - 10:48pm PT
|
There are savants, there are idiots, there are travelers, sometimes all three rolled into one.
|
|
EdwardT
Trad climber
Retired
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2017 - 07:00am PT
|
Ed - I think pud's point is that much of the discussion in political circles, as well as scientific ones, involve personal attacks... especially towards anyone skeptical of any aspect of "consensus" thinking. Either they're deniers or idiots. Denier connotes an intentional refusal to acknowledge or accept facts. So, either they're liars or idiots. Honest informed skepticism isn't an option.
Climate researchers, who challenge consensus thinking, become pariahs in their field. They point out it's career suicide for young scientists to challenge the orthodoxy. I've heard this from Judith Curry, Roger Pielke, Sr. and most recently William Happer.
It's about drowning out dissent, by whatever means.
|
|
Curt
climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2017 - 07:17am PT
|
...I think pud's point is that much of the discussion in political circles, as well as scientific ones, involve personal attacks... especially towards anyone skeptical of any aspect of "consensus" thinking. Either they're deniers or idiots. Denier connotes an intentional refusal to acknowledge or accept facts. So, either they're liars or idiots.
Climate researchers, who challenge consensus thinking, become pariahs in their field. They point out it's career suicide for young scientists to challenge the orthodoxy. I've heard this from Judith Curry, Roger Pielke, Sr. and most recently William Happer.
It's about drowning out dissent, by whatever means.
You're making a huge mistake by equating scientific discussion to political discussion. Skepticism in science is good--in fact it's a requirement, but refusal to acknowledge or accept scientific facts should bring ridicule. This is true to a much lesser extent in politics where "facts" are somewhat squishier.
Curt
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2017 - 07:32am PT
|
There's a difference between well informed skeptics and cranks.
|
|
pyro
Big Wall climber
Calabasas
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2017 - 07:34am PT
|
Pud your inappropriate..lol
Sometimes these elite intelects have to be brought back down from the clouds by some reasonable manager.
Ed im still figuring out how to use a calculator
|
|
Curt
climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2017 - 07:51am PT
|
Pyro's volcano meme has, of course, already been fully debunked but repeating the same lie over and over again has been well demonstrated to fool people who don't know any better.
Curt
|
|
pyro
Big Wall climber
Calabasas
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2017 - 08:01am PT
|
Curt it was produced by the russians..
|
|
pud
climber
Sportbikeville & Yucca brevifolia
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2017 - 08:50am PT
|
The best thing these climbing forum superior intellects can do to oppose their own argument is to keep telling everyone how smart they are and how dumb those that disagree with them are.
The referenced scientific data proves humans have an effect on the climate.
Nothing else.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2017 - 08:59am PT
|
"...and most recently William Happer.
It's about drowning out dissent, by whatever means."
what assumptions do you make about Will Happer? do you know the man (I do, but it's not like he's an old friend).
No one I know assails his physics research. His political opinions are another matter.
You seem to say his opinions regarding climate science have authority because he is an established scientist. Of course he has no scientific authority in climate science, he hasn't done any.
If you look at someone who had an equally negative view of climate science, Richard Muller, he dug in and did some good scientific work, and he reported it... his view now is quite different than the one he had when he started.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2017 - 09:02am PT
|
Ed im still figuring out how to use a calculator
too bad for you... apparently you're grammar challenged too...
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2017 - 09:22am PT
|
The referenced scientific data proves humans have an effect on the climate.
Nothing else.
I may misunderstand your statement, but if you are saying that the science hasn't considered alternative hypothesis you are incorrect. Science, also, doesn't "prove" anything... though it is perhaps more subtle than you or anyone else cares to delve into... rather, the hypotheses for other, potential causes, have been tested and they failed the test.
If you want a more literary explanation for this process, you can appeal to Sherlock Holmes' quote:
“Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.”
Hypothesis testing is "eliminating the impossible" and the hypothesis that human activity causes climate change has not been eliminated. Right now, there are no other hypotheses to explain the 20th & 21st century climate that pass the test.
And while you might object "well maybe something will come up to explain it other than what we think now?" given the risk that this alternative doesn't exist AND the consequence of inaction at this time implied by the current hypothesis, it would seem we are compelled to act based on our best understanding of the situation NOW.
As we learn more, we can modify our response... but the consequence of not acting now and the likelihood that our current picture is correct commits us to fixing a bigger problem later, if it can be fixed at all. This last bit is not alarmist, it is the statement that we do not know all the ramifications of the current, very rapid, climate change.
This period of climate change is unmatched in the history of Earth's climate. There is no information we have regarding what will happen to Earth's climate if the current change continues. It would be prudent to consider that when deciding what policies we should propose and execute in the coming years.
If "we" decide that "we" want to roll the dice and hope that everything will "work out fine" in the future, we should do it with the full understanding that the dice we are rolling are well understood by the science, and once we roll what is likely to come up has been studied.
Do you roll dice in Vegas?
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!