Greta

[MWG14]

Doesn’t that Swedish person ever go to school or does she think she knows it all already?


She’s off to Davos now for a world summit.

[ludwig]

// "They're in on it."
Yes they are. Research grants, lucrative expense accounts, foreign travel for conferences, to name but a few. //

I bet the scientists started the Australian fires. Apparently some people wearing white lab coats were seen acting suspiciously in the bush.

[Ellipsis]

> Even when they don't know the answers .... or more to the point when they ensure that the answers they give align with their personal world view.

That is possibly the most clueless thing I've ever seen you post on here, naomi24.

[naomi24]

Ellipsis, that's because you haven't thought about it - but no change there.

[jim360]

Did it not strike you from looking at the sources that there was therefore no truth in the suggestion that controlled burns would have been the saving grace? My judgement in that regard is neither here nor there, as is your opinion of it.

Also, I think it was implicit that if scientists are only "special" because of the choices they have made, then it follows that they aren't that special at all, really. Although I should have thought at least that the usual rule of thumb of jobs follows, namely that if it's your job then you are more likely to be good at it than someone for whom it's merely a hobby.

[margarettom]

Greta's book is now half price in our local shop, so probably not a runaway best seller.
I think that rather than stupid ideas that we eat less meat and dairy ( today's BBC online news), which in the latter instance would probably lead to an increase in osteoporosis, we should concentrate on practical ways of dealing with the ( probably natural) increase in temperature like improving flood defences etc.
Less hysteria and a more common sense approach might get more support.

[Theland]

Jim - That is rather arrogant.
I don't have a degree in climatology, but I have a degree of common sense, and can listen to lectures from both sides and make up my mind.

[naomi24]

//I think it was implicit that if scientists are only "special" because of the choices they have made, then it follows that they aren't that special at all, really. //

And around you go again, Jim. Another swift U-turn.

[jim360]

It's not arrogance, TL, it's an invitation. The arrogance if anything is in the other direction: why is it so hard to accept that a degree in Science, or more to the point the work that getting such a degree entails, might be useful in helping you to make up your own mind? Lectures in a specialist topic are, by definition, difficult to assess properly without some amount of specialisation.

[jim360]

No U-turn at all, Naomi. I'm not responsible for your inability to understand basic rhetoric.

[Ellipsis]

Theland, arrogance is thinking that your opinion counts as much as somebody else's, when yours just popped into your head and theirs is based on years of education, research, knowledge, skill, experience ...

[Theland]

So listening to advice from Phd's on both sides of the debate, and then making a decision is not worthwhile?
Even I can understand graphs, statistics and historical data.

[naomi24]

//a degree in Science, or more to the point the work that getting such a degree entails, might be useful in helping you to make up your own mind? //

It might be useful but it isn't necessary to those curious enough to enquire. Sir Patrick Moore managed well enough.

[Ellipsis]

> So listening to advice from Phd's on both sides of the debate, and then making a decision is not worthwhile?

Sounds great. How many from each side did you listen to? And would you care to share the names of any of them?

[jim360]

// Even I can understand graphs, statistics and historical data. //

When you keep reaching the wrong conclusions then that's open to debate. My advice to you, and I mean this in all seriousness, is to stop watching lectures that propose to answer questions and to start watching lectures that propose only to ask them. Science is a skill that can be trained like any other, but most people tend to train skills from the bottom up.

On the subject of the Big Bang, for example -- another one you're repeatedly simply wrong on -- you might want to take a step back from that and just take a general course in Cosmology, along with all of the maths that inevitably entails.

[Theland]

I would have to spend time going back on my history to do that.
Time.

[Theland]

Patrick Moor is one, joint founder of Greenpeace.

[jim360]

As for the Statistics, have you ever taken a course in it? Could you analyse raw data yourself, if given it? Or when you "understand" it, do you only ever mean the end product? In which case, by definition, you are wholly reliant on others to have produced, analysed, and interpreted the data correctly, which no ability to check their working.

[jim360]

It's never too late to start, TL.

[Theland]

William Happer.

[Theland]

Jim - With scientists on both sides of the debate, which ones do you suggest I listen to?
Happer is a Nobel Laureate, some of the climate alarmists claim to have a Nobel prize when In fact the IPCC was made the award, and the disingenuous scientists are simply associate members.