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- Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- Debt-Free US Treasury Forecast
- Analyzing Big City Crime (Part 2)
- Analyzing Big City Crime
- UK Migration Caused By Global Warming
- Climate Attribution In Greece
- “Brown: ’50 days to save world'”
- The Catastrophic Influence of Bovine Methane Emissions on Extraterrestrial Climate Patterns
- Posting On X
- Seventeen Years Of Fun
- The Importance Of Good Tools
- Temperature Shifts At Blue Hill, MA
- CO2²
- Time Of Observation Bias
- Climate Scamming For Profit
- Climate Scamming For Profit
- Back To The Future
- “records going back to 1961”
- Analyzing Rainfall At Asheville
- Historical Weather Analysis With Visitech
- “American Summers Are Starting to Feel Like Winter”
- Joker And Midnight Toker
- Cheering Crowds
- Understanding Flood Mechanisms
- Extreme Weather
 
- Recent Comments- Bob G on Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- conrad ziefle on Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- conrad ziefle on Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- Disillusioned on Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- conrad ziefle on Debt-Free US Treasury Forecast
- Nicholas McGinley on Debt-Free US Treasury Forecast
- Nicholas McGinley on Debt-Free US Treasury Forecast
- Bob G on Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- stewartpid on Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- Jehzsa on Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
 
 
			
“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.