SEE HERE AND HERE AND HERE Well I'd like to see an independent review, but I'm a bit skeptical about it. Picking the reviewers is already a "frocking" of the experts. I'd be almost more pleased by an out and out cat fight where one pits three groups the 1) believers, 2) the dissenters (disbelievers), and 3) the technically qualified but uncommitted. Then everyone can have a free-for-all. The rules of the game should include the provision that you have to present 1) your data, 2) your principles on which you analyzed your data, 3) your rationale that this is enough, and 4) your defense against what you think are strongest arguments of those that disagree. Then we might actually learn something. Right now I'd have to say that I'm on the fence. This sounds just like the beginning of a structural white wash job. HERE's THE RUN UP
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Independent Review of Climate Science Funded by UN
SEE HERE AND HERE AND HERE Well I'd like to see an independent review, but I'm a bit skeptical about it. Picking the reviewers is already a "frocking" of the experts. I'd be almost more pleased by an out and out cat fight where one pits three groups the 1) believers, 2) the dissenters (disbelievers), and 3) the technically qualified but uncommitted. Then everyone can have a free-for-all. The rules of the game should include the provision that you have to present 1) your data, 2) your principles on which you analyzed your data, 3) your rationale that this is enough, and 4) your defense against what you think are strongest arguments of those that disagree. Then we might actually learn something. Right now I'd have to say that I'm on the fence. This sounds just like the beginning of a structural white wash job. HERE's THE RUN UP
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment