[Vision2020] Why you're not getting anywhere, Ted

[Art Deco]

There is nothing wrong with being a skeptic.  In fact, that in  part is how science progresses --rechecking data experiments etc, and, forming and testing alternative hypotheses.

When it comes to deciding if action is necessary, how necessary, and what that action should be, then there the matter of highest probability to consider.

W.
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Paul Rumelhart 
  To: Ron Force 
  Cc: vision2020 at moscow.com 
  Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2010 5:20 PM
  Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Why you're not getting anywhere, Ted


  You know, I wouldn't spend so much time trying to defend the skeptical 
  viewpoint if it weren't for the following:

  - Apparent data manipulations such as the hockey stick graph that erases 
  the previously accepted medieval warm period and little ice age in order 
  to show a politically powerful graph.

  - Data chart manipulations such as splicing proxy data and temperature 
  data together in order to make a graph show something that the proxy 
  data didn't show, instead of throwing out the proxy data as unusable 
  because it conflicted with the temperature data.

  - Climate scientists doing back flips to avoid FOIA requests for data 
  and having an adversarial relationship with anyone who has the nerve to 
  question their findings instead of making any and all data freely 
  available to the public.

  - A climate (no pun intended) in which the main stream media has made 
  people who question any part of the AGW-hypothesis out to be flat 
  earthers or holocaust deniers, while promoting the most outlandish 
  doomsday scenarios as if they were unquestionably true.

  - The fact that the climate scientists mentioned above have the ear of 
  the President and control the UN IPCC and have the potential to sink our 
  economy.

  and, lastly,

  - The refusal of AGW-hypothesis proponents to talk about any of the 
  above without using the refrain "please cite a peer reviewed paper", 
  when the peer review process is controlled by these same individuals 
  with political influence and who have threatened in the Climategate 
  emails to manipulate that process if they had to.

  I only look into this deeper because the whole things smells to me of 
  bullshit, and because the more I look into it the more reason I have to 
  believe that most of the current warming is natural and not man-made.  I 
  could easily be wrong, but don't expect me to be shamed into silence any 
  time soon.

  Paul

  Ron Force wrote:
  > http://www.treelobsters.com/2010/01/118-skeptics-charlatans.html
  >
  > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
  >
  > =======================================================
  >  List services made available by First Step Internet, 
  >  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
  >                http://www.fsr.net                       
  >           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
  > =======================================================


  =======================================================
   List services made available by First Step Internet, 
   serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
                 http://www.fsr.net                       
            mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
  =======================================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20100117/74b802f3/attachment.html