To: Bread Upon The Water who wrote (1871 ) 9/14/2011 12:46:23 PM From: Jorj X Mckie 4 Recommendations Read Replies (1) | Respond to They are challenging the 9 out of 10, if not more, scientists who disagree with "their" scientists for a non-scientific reason : That is, these 9 out of 10 are "biased" because climategate shows that. And that's not about science but about politics. This is an incorrect statement. You throw out that the non pro-AGW scientists disagree with the Pro-AGW scientists based on non-scientific reasons. This is something you made up. First, part of the scientific process is providing one's methods and results so that they can be duplicated. When evidence is presented that the pro-AGW scientists wouldn't do this, it is proof that THEY were doing something that didn't support the scientific process. Scientists pointing out that other scientists are not following the scientific process is still science. And why do you choose to go, apparently, with the small minority of scientists on this issue? You think their science is better? And you feel qualified to evaluate it? I have been presented with evidence and you have been presented with evidence. You have made your decision apparently based on the "majority rules in science" criteria. Not a method I would use, but that is your choice. I have looked at the evidence and the way it was presented and have made the best decision I can. When someone presents a "the sky is falling, the sky is falling" message, I am immediately skeptical. When it is clear that the message comes with a demand for money and for me to change my way of life, the criteria for me accepting their position just became even more stringent. And then when the people who are shouting "the sky is falling, the sky is falling!" while demanding money and for me to change my way of life are caught being dishonest, well....it pretty much destroys their case right there. But then add on to the fact that they are ignoring simple things in their proofs (and their proofs are the models) and ignore things like the fact that we are at the tail end of an interglacial period....you tell me why I should give them any credit. Remember, they are the ones who want to change the status quo. They are the ones demanding money. It is incumbent on them to make their airtight case. It is not incumbent on me to counter every single aspect of their position. All I have to do is counter ONE aspect to demand that they go back to the drawing board.
