4 plus ones
Shared publicly•View activity
View 5 previous comments
- My first comment was in response to . Why a scientist might "hobble" FOI requests. It is not because they have anything against the openness of information. It was a very case specific objection. IN the long term, they had no alternative to make information available whether they liked the requesters or not. That is a good thing.
Anything someone wants to claim as a fact needs proof. The article mentioned the supposedly FTL neutrinos but, there will be much more prosaic things such as MPs expenses that need proof.
There are many things that cannot be proved to people. The public relies on others to verify things. The readership of publications like Nature is very small but their influence is large. If things are not proved to the satisfaction of scientists and engineers, then the alternatives of big money, politics and hearsay take over again.Feb 27, 2012
- I am sure that is the basis of much of the resistance to FOIA requests. However, if a scientist has a testable theory and good data, they should be a lot less inclined to resist allowing others to verify their assumptions, data, and results.Feb 27, 2012
- According to their internal mail, which they did not expect to be made public, it was.
The facts and figures are continually misinterpreted by those who want everyone to believe differently. Have a look at http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2012/02/02/a-case-study-of-the-tactics-of-climate-change-denial-in-which-i-am-the-target/ for an example.Feb 27, 2012
- I've read all that stuff. Personally, I think much of it is baloney. The number of accurate reports about fudged data, hockey stick charts and the like is simply too overwhelming. If somebody makes a mistake with your data, you can explain to them what they did wrong - that's part of the scientific process. The IPCC's computer models can't even reproduce historical data, much less make accurate forecasts.Feb 27, 2012
- If I have a choice between most scientists and corporately funded 'studies' I will trend to believe the scientists.Feb 27, 2012
- Look, you're a warmist, and I'm a skeptic. Let's not waste our time.Feb 27, 2012