At a meeting last week I once again encountered resistance to describing those who refuse to accept the science that suggests a possible catastrophic Global Warming as “Deniers”. We had a discussion of suggestions:
Skeptics: this term is true of the approach of ALL scientists to ALL proposals. As Carl Sagan said; we greet any idea with skepticism, examine the scientific observations and theory, and accept on this basis. So those who deny the scientific observations are actually the opposite of skeptics (similarly for “critics” & “questioners”).
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- “Earlier Than Usual”
- Perfect Correlation
- Elon’s Hockey Stick
- Latest Climate News
- “Climate dread is everywhere”
- “The Atmosphere Is ‘Thirstier.’”
- Skynet Becomes Self Aware
- “We Have To Vote For It So That You Can See What’s In It”
- Diversity Is Our Strength
- “even within the lifetime of our children”
- 60 Years Of Progress in London
- The Anti-Greta
- “a persistent concern”
- Deadliest US Tornado Days
- The Other Side Of The Pond
- “HEMI V8 Roars Back”
- Big Pharma Sales Tool
- Your Tax Dollars At Work
- 622 billion tons of new ice
- Fossil Fuels To Turn The UK Tropical
- 100% Tariffs On Chinese EV’s
- Fossil Fuels Cause Fungus
- Prophets Of Doom
- The Green New Deal Lives On
- Mission Accomplished!
Recent Comments
- Bob G on “Earlier Than Usual”
- MLH on “Earlier Than Usual”
- Gordon Vigurs on Perfect Correlation
- Jack the Insider on “Earlier Than Usual”
- Bob G on “Earlier Than Usual”
- John Francis on “Earlier Than Usual”
- John Francis on “Earlier Than Usual”
- Terry Shipman on “Earlier Than Usual”
- arn on “Earlier Than Usual”
- Gordon Vigurs on “Earlier Than Usual”
“So those who deny the scientific observations are actually the opposite of skeptics”. So who is denying the scientific OBSERVATIONS? It’s what they (GISS, the IPCC weenies, and the Hockey Team et al) DO to the raw observations that makes me sceptical. And since when did computer models consitute observations?
I think this Bob Brown is getting his terminology confused – i.e. confusing the term “observations” with something else. “Interpretations” or “hypotheses” or something.