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
- Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- COP29 Preview
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- A Giant Eyesore
- CO2 To Destroy The World In Ten Years
- Rats Jumping Off The Climate Ship
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- “False Claims” And Outright Lies”
- Michael Mann Cancelled By CNN
- Spoiled Children
- Great Lakes Storm Of November 11, 1835
- Harris To Win Iowa
- Angry Democrats
- November 9, 1913 Storm
- Science Magazine Explains Trump Supporters
- Obliterating Bill Gates
- Scientific American Editor In Chief Speaks Out
- The End Of Everything
- Harris To Win In A Blowout
- Election Results
- “Glaciers, Icebergs Melt As World Gets Warmer”
- “falsely labeling”
- Vote For Change By Electing The Incumbent
- Protesting Too Much Snow
- Glaciers Vs. The Hockey Stick
Recent Comments
- Disillusioned on Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- Disillusioned on Michael Mann Cancelled By CNN
- Disillusioned on Michael Mann Cancelled By CNN
- Gamecock on CO2 To Destroy The World In Ten Years
- dearieme on COP29 Preview
- Greg in NZ on COP29 Preview
- conrad ziefle on A Giant Eyesore
- GeologyJim on A Giant Eyesore
- arn on UK Labour To Save The Planet
- Tel on UK Labour To Save The Planet
“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.