[Vision2020] The green hijack of the Met Office is cripplingBritain

[Paul Rumelhart]

Well, I don't know what to tell you.  I've looked into evolution and 
what's behind it, and it made sense.  I came away from it even more 
convinced that the very underpinnings of evolution were sound.  In fact, 
I used some of the basics of natural selection and evolutionary theory 
to design a program that watches the stock market looking for stocks to 
invest in, using genetic algorithms.  I've looked at some of the actual 
facts, and came to the same conclusions.

Climate science sets off my bullshit detectors, though.  Too much 
political pressure, too much reliance on the idea of conformity amidst 
the community, almost no examination of other hypotheses.  They're 
assuming their hypothesis is true, and are trying to prove it.  They 
should be assuming their hypothesis is false and should be trying to 
find holes in it.  Throw some obvious crap in the mix like trying to 
wipe out the Little Ice Age and the Medieval Warm Period in order to 
pretend that temperatures were stable until mankind fucked it up, and my 
bullshit detector explodes. 

The earth is warming, but it was warming even before SUVs hit the 
market.  Climate has been changing forever.  I see no reason to believe 
that mankind is behind enough of it that taking massive sweeping 
measures at this time is warranted.  Come up with some validated 
predictions, and maybe I'll give the models a closer look.  Take, say, 
20 years to show me how close everything that is happening fits their 
models and maybe I'll stop thinking of them as a bunch of politically 
connected buffoons suffering from confirmation bias.

Paul

Andreas Schou wrote:
> That's a little harsh. Sorry. Shouldn't send email at midnight.
>
> It's just bizarre to see someone who's normally so well-informed, and
> a huge advocate of science, attacking literally an entire field of
> science. Climatology's consensus around global warming is as uniform
> and well-supported as biology's consensus around evolution. What's
> left over is a motley collection of crank physicists, conservative
> economists, conspiracy bloggers, geologists, and TV weathermen,
> well-funded by the petroleum industry. They've produced an argument
> that's superficially convincing to the myopic and managed to (since
> the 1990s) disinform a plurality of Americans, who -- back in the
> 1990s -- used to believe in global warming.
>
> I've tried to stay quiet, but the whole thing just makes me nauseous.
>
> --  ACS
>
>