All Scientists are Sceptics ~Professor Bob Carter

Whenever someone asserts that a scientific question is “settled,” they tell me immediately that they don’t understand the first thing about science. Science is never settled. Dr David Deming

Perhaps the most frustrating aspect of the science of climate change is the lack of any real substance in attempts to justify the hypothesis ~Professor Stewart Franks

A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf

Saturday, 24 November 2012

Let's rid the airwaves of this bile.

Despicable comment.
There was much of a stir when Alan Jones made a flippant (although despicable) comment. Surely, we will see a similar reaction to a despicable comment by Robyn Williams?

As Jo Nova writes (with H/t to Graham Young)
This morning on the “science” show Robyn Williams equates skeptics to pedophiles, people pushing asbestos, and drug pushers. Williams starts the show by framing republicans (and skeptics) as liars: “New Scientist complained about the “gross distortions” and “barefaced lying” politicians come out  with…” He’s goes on to make the most blatant, baseless, and outrageous insults by equating skeptics to people who promote pedophilia, asbestos and drugs.
Let's hold Williams' outbursts up against the New Scientist standards.  On the Science show site (link)
If 95, 96 or 97% of scientists say that human activity is driving the world temperature higher, why is it that some people reject the view of the overwhelming majority? Stephan Lewandowsky  has studied scepticism. In the field of climate science the so-called sceptics he says are not sceptical, they are rejecting the evidence for ideological reasons, and a personal world view. 
Let's disregard the unscientific "IF" in the first line....
95, 96 or 97% of scientists say that human activity is driving the world temperature higher, why is it that some people reject the view of the overwhelming majority?
First, the 97% was arrived at by a flawed poll. Surely you know that, Mr Williams? It has been exposed here, here, here etc
why is it that some people reject the view of the overwhelming majority?
Well, perhaps because a consensus is not science, Mr Williams. You can push a hypothesis as much as you like, but once it has been falsified, it just becomes yesterday's idle thoughts. As Einstein said:
No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong.”

When Marshall and Warren went against the consensus (that the cause of  peptic ulcers was lifestyle)
they met the same derision that realist scientists are experiencing from the alarmists. Marshall and Warren scientifically showed that peptic ulcers could be treated with antibiotics. It has also "led to an increased understanding of the connection between chronic infection, inflammation, and cancer," according to a Nobel Prize news release.  (Link)

The item then quotes Stephan Lewandosky (See also Lies-damn-lies-and-stephen-lewandosky.)
In the field of climate science the so-called sceptics he (Lewandosky) says are not sceptical, they are rejecting the evidence for ideological reasons, and a personal world view.
I will put this to you  Mr Lewandosky (and Mr Williams)
In the field of climate science the alarmisists are not scientific, they are rejecting the evidence for ideological reasons, and a personal world view.


1 comment:

  1. 'The Science Show' now needs renaming as 'The Pseudo-scientific Propaganda Show'.

    ReplyDelete





All serious comments published after moderation.
Comments should be polite, and respect all views.
No bad language. Spam never makes it!