Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: allmendream

10 posted on 12/12/2009 2:31:51 PM PST by GloriaJane (http://www.last.fm/user/GloriaJane)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: GloriaJane
Exactly what science is not.

Science doesn't require that you rely upon the authority of the source, just that you trust the integrity of the process, and can be convinced by the DATA.

The data that climate “scientists” had to use a “trick” to “hide the decline” and then DESTROYED the raw data.

They also attacked the process. “redefine peer review literature if we have to”. They knew they had to.

This stabs right at the heart of the two pillars of acceptance of scientific theory: integrity of the process, convinced by the data.

Without the integrity of the process one must be a modern day Faraday and attempt to replicate ever experiment before you believe it; and there simply isn't the money or time.

Closing ranks is absolutely ludicrous. Climatology is NOT the hill to pick to die on for Science, the Earth's climate, being unique - isn't really subject to scientific experimentation now is it?

13 posted on 12/12/2009 2:40:24 PM PST by allmendream (Wealth is EARNED not distributed, so how could it be RE-distributed?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson