"Two eminent climate scientists discuss the ...." Topic
7 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please don't make fun of others' membernames.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Science Plus Board
Areas of InterestGeneral
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Featured Ruleset
Featured Showcase Article
Featured Profile ArticleHow is a China-based wargaming company getting by in the time of coronavirus?
|
Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
Tango01 | 06 Apr 2017 3:45 p.m. PST |
… policy debate. Their clash tells us much. "Summary: The climate policy debate heats up, as seen in this exchange between two climate scientists sparked by last week's House hearing about climate change. It illuminates the areas of agreement and debate among scientists, which is an important aspect of the policy debate — but seldom mentioned by journalists…" Main page link Amicalement Armand
|
Martin From Canada | 06 Apr 2017 5:11 p.m. PST |
I wouldn't call the second one "eminent"… |
Cacique Caribe | 06 Apr 2017 8:26 p.m. PST |
You guys keep confusing me. I thought Science was Science and that there was no discussion about it. Dan |
GarrisonMiniatures | 07 Apr 2017 1:16 a.m. PST |
Science is science and should always involve discussion. In science, you observe and test. Without discussion, interpretation tends to be awkward sometimes. |
Bowman | 07 Apr 2017 5:20 a.m. PST |
Fabius Maximus, "Helping to re-ignite the spirit of a nation grown cold." Sheesh. It's hardly an even handed exposition of the two viewpoints either. But more importantly, it is hardly an "exchange between two climate scientists", Seiter vs Pielke. It would be more accurate to say its a difference of opinion between Pielke and the entire AMS. You guys keep confusing me. Dan, you don't need our help. |
Cacique Caribe | 07 Apr 2017 1:03 p.m. PST |
Lol. Then stop adding to my already confused state. Dan |
GarrisonMiniatures | 11 Apr 2017 3:24 a.m. PST |
I'd say that the confusion is due to the politics of the debate rather than the science of the debate. Confusion always seems to be one of the main results of politics – too many 'alternative truths' in politics, in science very few things are considered 'true' until they have been proved! |
|