The Central Issue
by chunkdz"The scientific community would come down on me in no uncertain terms if I said the world had cooled from 1998."
-Phil Jones, Former Director of the Climatic Research Unit
No, Professor Jones. No. The true scientific community (scientists, using the scientific method) are keenly interested in thorough, unadulterated observation and recording of data. The scientific community therefore would not bat an eye if presented with your data that says the Earth has been cooling. This is what they do. Objectively, unemotionally collect data, and use it to further understanding.
The group that you seem so terribly afraid of, Professor Jones, is the political/ideological community. The fact that you are unable or unwilling to distinguish between the scientific community and the ideological community – that they have become conflated in your mind – this is the fundamental perversion of science that must be corrected at once.
December 9th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
Whatever happened to intrepid intellectuals? Gotta see which way the wind is blowing first? Tenure has backfired. Rather than furthering academic freedom it has become perverted and held as a carrot; awarded to the most docile among us.
Comment by Bradford — December 9, 2009 @ 4:33 pm
December 9th, 2009 at 6:18 pm
I have a question for all of those who for the last few years have been playing up threats to science. Where are you? Is the silence an admission of hypocrisy?
Comment by Bradford — December 9, 2009 @ 6:18 pm
December 9th, 2009 at 7:20 pm
Kenneth R. Miller comes immediately to mind.
Kenneth Miller on climate change:
Comment by Mung — December 9, 2009 @ 7:20 pm
December 9th, 2009 at 7:47 pm
OK Mung. Now we know the position of ID critics on climate change. It must be accompanied by hostility to generate heat.
Comment by Bradford — December 9, 2009 @ 7:47 pm
December 9th, 2009 at 8:44 pm
There is no difference! This is what I've been saying all along – ideology colors thinking – period. Scientists are not immune.
Comment by Daniel Smith — December 9, 2009 @ 8:44 pm
December 10th, 2009 at 1:19 am
Daniel:
Right. It explains how one can think an inference of intelligent design is a threat to civilization while petty vindictiveness (by a scientist) against a journal for publishing non-standard views is ignored.
Where is the outrage? Submerged in swamps? It seems Terds vs. Tards will have to await a future thread.
Comment by Bradford — December 10, 2009 @ 1:19 am
December 10th, 2009 at 2:07 pm
The temperature is in the teens here and I have a broken heater. I'd love to have some warmth-retaining CO2 in my apartment right now.
Comment by Mung — December 10, 2009 @ 2:07 pm
December 12th, 2009 at 10:27 pm
Fixed it for you chunk.
Comment by angryoldfatman — December 12, 2009 @ 10:27 pm