All the News That Fits the Story

By -
So, what does an ideologue make of an experiment that shows how little we still know about the atmosphere? Well, it's conclusive evidence that AGW is a hoax, of course!

Comments

  1. Avram8:35 PM

    How dare someone try out scientific enquiry by himself.

    LETS LAUGH AT HIS FAILURE.

    Right, Gene, what a moron? I mean this guy, he's kidding himself. Unbelievable the kind of jokers this world produces.

    ReplyDelete
  2. gcallah8:59 PM

    What in the world are you talking about, Avram? Did you actually read the story at the physics web site?

    1) The work was done by a team, not a lone individual. Science is always a social enterprise.

    2) The conclusions of the actual scientists are very tentative. It's the political people writing it up who have concluded this disproves AGW. No scientists were saying anything like that.

    3) I am not laughing at any of the scientists at all. I have said quite clearly that AGW may prove to be non-existent. I also know you and I are in no position to decide that. The scientists will sort it out. They should explore other hypotheses. I applaud their efforts. In fact, it would be quite a relief if there was no AGW!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Avram9:12 PM

    I misunderstood entirely.

    Which makes me happy because earlier I was upset at what I thought you were saying but you're not saying that so its ok.

    See I read it as you saying one idealogue scientist made an experiment that he thinks disproved AGW and that in the process he humilated himself and you were joining in on the laughing.

    Apologies.

    ReplyDelete
  4. gcallah9:16 PM

    Thank you for your apology, Avram!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose...
Read more