1 posted on
01/28/2008 6:28:24 AM PST by
mattstat
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-23 next last
To: mattstat
Climatology is one of the many fields of Scientology.
2 posted on
01/28/2008 6:33:43 AM PST by
counterpunch
(Mike Huckabee — The Religious Wrong)
To: mattstat
It’s not science, it’s religion. Just beleeeeeeve.........
3 posted on
01/28/2008 6:37:09 AM PST by
Red Badger
( We don't have science, but we do have consensus.......)
To: mattstat
4 posted on
01/28/2008 6:37:36 AM PST by
onedoug
To: mattstat
"Climatology" doesn't adhere to the rigorous testing standards of the scientific method. The use of the word "consensus" to describe the position of the scientific community on climate change was the biggest indicator of all (there is no need to seek "consensus" in science, if your methods are valid and your results can be replicated).
If "climatology" were really scientific, don't y'all think Al Gore and the IPCC would have won a Nobel Prize in a scientific field instead of in the one area that is -- by definition -- overtly political?
5 posted on
01/28/2008 6:40:35 AM PST by
Alberta's Child
(I'm out on the outskirts of nowhere . . . with ghosts on my trail, chasing me there.)
To: mattstat
Not so much a pseudo science as a pseudo religion.
6 posted on
01/28/2008 6:44:10 AM PST by
arthurus
(Better to fight them OVER THERE than to have to fight them OVER HERE!)
To: mattstat
Is climatology a pseudo-science? No, but honest climatologists are not predicting global warming either. It is the Al Gore crowd that wants us to think that climatology = prediction of man-made climate change.
7 posted on
01/28/2008 6:48:13 AM PST by
Smile-n-Win
(Everything that breathes emits CO2. Anti-carbon is anti-life.)
To: mattstat
My Dutch friend folded her arms and announced “I BELIVE in global warming”. Her reasons for BELIVING was because when she was a child she skated on the frozen canals in Amsterdam and today they don’t freeze.
I folded my arms and said “I believe in the sun”.
8 posted on
01/28/2008 6:48:25 AM PST by
Ditter
To: mattstat
Climatology is a real science. Unfortunately many of it’s practicioners have become pseudo-scientists.
9 posted on
01/28/2008 7:01:32 AM PST by
Hacklehead
(Crush the liberals, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentation of the hippies.)
To: mattstat
Whether a field is psuedo-science or not has nothing to do with whether its practitioners are nice or noble.
mlo
10 posted on
01/28/2008 7:03:31 AM PST by
mlo
To: mattstat
He left out (5) Fudge the data.
11 posted on
01/28/2008 7:06:49 AM PST by
palmer
To: mattstat
Although there are many “climatologists” playing like they’re scientists...giving climatology a bad name...climatology is a bona fide science....the study of average weather patterns over time.
13 posted on
01/28/2008 7:09:03 AM PST by
ElectricStrawberry
(1/27 Wolfhounds...cut in half during the Clinton years.)
To: mattstat
Until climatologists can accurately predict this afternoons weather, I take everything they say with a grain of salt.
14 posted on
01/28/2008 7:23:12 AM PST by
svcw
(The main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing.)
To: mattstat
Is medical “science” a pseudo-science?
No but that doesn’t keep tens/hundreds of thousands of supposely “learned”, intelligent practitioners from constantly being DEAD-WRONG on things like: “Everyone knows that butter is bad for you but margarine is good for you...”, “Everyone knows that fluoride fights cavities and is good for your teeth...”, and on and on...
To: mattstat
I’m not sure I agree with the article. If I weed out all of the hype that is generated by the MSM, politicians and arm-chair environmentalists, there is still a noticable element of bias amongst climatologists.
For example, if you research who is performing the “peer reviews” of the published work of climatologists, you’ll find it to be somewhat incestious. It also has become exceedingly difficult to publish papers critical of AGW.
If you review the quality control of the ground-based temperature measurements, you’d be shocked at how anyone can claim to ascertain a fraction of a degree increase over any length of time. The data is largely junk, but in general climatologists won’t tell you that their models should be taken with a grain of salt.
18 posted on
01/28/2008 7:50:09 AM PST by
kidd
To: mattstat
Is climatology a pseudo-science? There are honest climatologists who employ the scientific approach. And there are dishonest ones advancing a political agenda.
Slamming climatology for global warming is like blaming guns for committing crimes.
19 posted on
01/28/2008 8:00:00 AM PST by
okie01
(THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance on Parade)
To: mattstat
Climatology is not so much a science as it is an application of mathematics.
To: mattstat
It might be that many of them are misleading themselves by custom tailoring models to show them what they expect (or desire?) to see, but this has not reached a level where it is done with intent. Whew! What a relief! Their errors are unintentional. (though vast)
So would that make them um.... what's the word? Wrong?
21 posted on
01/28/2008 8:04:24 AM PST by
Brett66
(Where government advances, and it advances relentlessly , freedom is imperiled -Janice Rogers Brown)
To: mattstat
junk science created for legislative and courtroom monetary profit.
23 posted on
01/28/2008 8:32:15 AM PST by
longtermmemmory
(VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
To: Beowulf; Defendingliberty; WL-law; Normandy
To: mattstat
Pseudo-religion.
Pseudo-cult!
27 posted on
01/28/2008 2:28:18 PM PST by
airborne
(The Founding Fathers would be deeply saddened.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-23 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson