Backboards: 
Posts: 162

Clive Crook has a change of heart on the so called "Climategate" affair;

"In my previous post on Climategate I blithely said that nothing in the climate science email dump surprised me much. Having waded more deeply over the weekend I take that back.

The closed-mindedness of these supposed men of science, their willingness to go to any lengths to defend a preconceived message, is surprising even to me. The stink of intellectual corruption is overpowering."



And from the comments section;




Johnny Longtorso November 30, 2009 11:00 AM

Any doubts that if President Gore had gotten anti-AGW legislation back in '00-'02, the currently "inexplicable" pause in warming would have been credited to Strong Government Action and we'd have to put up with a chorus of "Gore saved us all - everything you have you owe to Him"?

Any doubts at all?



Peter Asher November 30, 2009 12:12 PM

Occam's razor states that the simplest explanation or strategy tends to be the best one. Scientists often rely on this principle when designing a hypothesis. What could be the simplest explanation as to why leading climate scientists refused to share source materials? Why were they so aggresive towards anyone who offered any dissent? This is not normal behavior. Scientists and academics who do not share source materials are not given the benefit of the doubt. If a scientific journal publishes an opposing view, the normal response is not to threaten a boycott of the journal. The simplest explanation is that the science behind global warming is bad.






Post a message   top
Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.