Comments on: Why You Should Be Hot and Bothered About ‘Climate-Gate’

By: kencreten

kencreten — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 00:15:11 +0000

I live with a scientist. Trick is used. Hiding a decline might be useful in that people don't understand Science. In fact this “climate-gate” may be exactly what Climate Scientists feared. There is always fighting in Science, always disagreements. The point of Science is to weed out those opinions that don't line up with the facts as shown in the best data we have. Until the data on any known subject is “perfect”, which is not possible, you will never eliminate disagreements in Science. The general population does not understand Science in that almost none understand that Scientific hypothesis must be falsifiable. There's plenty of climate data now to show that things very well “may” be heading in a terrible direction. But, it's always possible that Science could be wrong. In a way, Science lives to be wrong, then righted, then be wrong, then righted. People don't in general understand a system where doubt is not only entertained, but absolutely necessary, and I'm guessing that in general people don't understand that disagreement in Science is essential.

Climate-”gate” is a disaster, but probably not why people think. Scientists generally can't get messages through to people because they are too ignorant of Science itself. Again, the word “trick” is used often in Science, and does not mean “untruth.”

By: Tuna Ghost

Tuna Ghost — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 03:52:19 +0000

What would RAW say? Probably something like “Stop treating me like I'm an authority you can appeal to”, I bet.

By: wfzlsster

wfzlsster — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 13:54:52 +0000

By referencing an article from FOX News you discredit the importance of this story. Perhaps that was the idea.

By: 5by5

5by5 — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 13:09:12 +0000

I hear a lot of talk about these emails which it seems come from a conversation between a whopping two scientists (not even remotely enough to counteract the thousands of other researchers or their data worldwide), but no printouts of the entire exchange.

Faux "News" is quite frankly known for intentionally taking people's quotes out of context even when they're public, and because these are supposedly "super-secret squirrel" emails, they have even more opportunity to warp the meaning here.

Moreover, even if one year's temps or even 5-10 years temps go down, it does not change the larger trend of overall increases which are exponential, nor does it do anything to dispute the altered weather patterns globally, or the loss of habitat or increased extinction rates of a huge number of species from environmental contaminants created by humans.

In short, this is irrelevant BS.

By: tonyviner

tonyviner — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 06:27:09 +0000

Fox did it to themselves, they used to be a reputable source of news and information. Nevermind, that was the Bible.

This sucks for people that really care about the environment AND the truth.

By: Brandon

Brandon — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 04:41:47 +0000

it sucks that it's a fox news article. that automatically disqualifies anything there in regardless of whether or not there's any fact whatsoever presented. Disinfo should know by now. oh yea they cater to the “leftists”. I really gotta wonder what RAW would have to say about our current state of affairs.