<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)"><!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#44546A;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72"><div class=WordSection1><p><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>However “honest” Mr. Foreman finds his opinions, they are abysmally indefensible (and profoundly ignorant) when compared to verifiable facts. The following article explains, at least in part, his inability to recognize the thinking errors he made in his curiously wrongheaded approach to climate change in his response to a constituent..<o:p></o:p></span></p><p><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>Rose Huskey<o:p></o:p></span></p><p><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>“At some point in the history of all scientific theories, only a minority of scientists—or even just one—supported them, before evidence accumulated to the point of general acceptance. The Copernican model, germ theory, the vaccination principle, evolutionary theory, plate tectonics and the big bang theory were all once heretical ideas that became consensus science. How did this happen?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>An answer may be found in what 19th-century philosopher of science William Whewell called a “consilience of inductions.” For a theory to be accepted, Whewell argued, it must be based on more than one induction—or a single generalization drawn from specific facts. It must have multiple inductions that converge on one another, independently but in conjunction. “Accordingly the cases in which inductions from classes of facts altogether different have thus <i>jumped together</i>,” he wrote in his 1840 book <i>The Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences</i>, “belong only to the best established theories which the history of science contains.” Call it a “convergence of evidence.”<o:p></o:p></span></p><p><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>Consensus science is a phrase often heard today in conjunction with anthropogenic global warming (AGW). Is there a consensus on AGW? There is. The tens of thousands of scientists who belong to the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Chemical Society, the American Geophysical Union, the American Medical Association, the American Meteorological Society, the American Physical Society, the Geological Society of America, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences and, most notably, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change all concur that AGW is in fact real. Why?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>It is not because of the sheer number of scientists. After all, science is not conducted by poll. As Albert Einstein said in response to a 1931 book skeptical of relativity theory entitled <i>100 Authors against Einstein</i>, “Why 100? If I were wrong, one would have been enough.” The answer is that there is a convergence of evidence from multiple lines of inquiry—pollen, tree rings, ice cores, corals, glacial and polar ice-cap melt, sea-level rise, ecological shifts, carbon dioxide increases, the unprecedented rate of temperature increase—that all converge to a singular conclusion. AGW doubters point to the occasional anomaly in a particular data set, as if one incongruity gainsays all the other lines of evidence. But that is not how consilience science works. For AGW skeptics to overturn the consensus, they would need to find flaws with all the lines of supportive evidence <i>and</i> show a consistent convergence of evidence toward a different theory that explains the data. (Creationists have the same problem overturning evolutionary theory.) This they have not done.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>A 2013 study published in <i>Environmental Research Letters</i> by Australian researchers John Cook, Dana Nuccitelli and their colleagues examined 11,944 climate paper abstracts published from 1991 to 2011. Of those papers that stated a position on AGW, about 97 percent concluded that climate change is real and caused by humans. What about the remaining 3 percent or so of studies? What if they're right? In a 2015 paper published in <i>Theoretical and Applied Climatology</i>, Rasmus Benestad of the Norwegian Meteorological Institute, Nuccitelli and their colleagues examined the 3 percent and found “a number of methodological flaws and a pattern of common mistakes.” That is, instead of the 3 percent of papers converging to a better explanation than that provided by the 97 percent, they failed to converge to anything.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>“There is no cohesive, consistent alternative theory to human-caused global warming,” Nuccitelli concluded in an August 25, 2015, commentary in the <i>Guardian</i>. “Some blame global warming on the sun, others on orbital cycles of other planets, others on ocean cycles, and so on. There is a 97% expert consensus on a cohesive theory that's overwhelmingly supported by the scientific evidence, but the 2–3% of papers that reject that consensus are all over the map, even contradicting each other. The one thing they seem to have in common is methodological flaws like cherry picking, curve fitting, ignoring inconvenient data, and disregarding known physics.” For example, one skeptical paper attributed climate change to lunar or solar cycles, but to make these models work for the 4,000-year period that the authors considered, they had to throw out 6,000 years' worth of earlier data.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>Such practices are deceptive and fail to further climate science when exposed by skeptical scrutiny, an integral element to the scientific process.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>This article was originally published with the title "Consilience and Consensus"<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><a href="https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-climate-skeptics-are-wrong/">https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-climate-skeptics-are-wrong/</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:14.0pt'> vision2020-bounces@moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces@moscow.com] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Saundra Lund<br><b>Sent:</b> Saturday, February 11, 2017 11:10 AM<br><b>To:</b> 'Moscow Vision 2020'<br><b>Subject:</b> [Vision2020] When the Lunatics Run the Asylum<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'>Visionaries:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'>Prior to the election, some of us were aware of the unhinged extremism that is Dan Foreman, which is why he <b>lost</b> the Republican primary in Latah County for sheriff. Rank partisanship -- rather than running a worthy candidate – “inspired” the local GOP party to decide that particular loser would make a great fill-in candidate for senator. SMH. While many folks weren’t aware of the depths of Foreman’s extremism, one thing is certain: <b>local Republican party leaders</b> <b>absolutely knew</b> and backed him anyway. Their plan was to keep a tight lid on his extremism for public consumption just to get someone elected with a “R” after his name rather than run a quality candidate. Sad!<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'>The rest of us – at least those of us with connected brain cells, anyway – realized how completely out of touch with reality Foreman was in early January when he was outed by in an article entitled, “</span><span lang=EN style='font-size:14.0pt;color:red'><a href="http://www.idahostatesman.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article125859554.html">Idaho lawmaker would charge women who have abortions with murder</a></span><span lang=EN style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'>.”<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'>And, this theocrat craving man just continues to let his freak flag fly high, and we can now add anti-science and anti-common sense to his litany of “antis” which include (but are not limited to) anti-women, anti-child, anti-public education, anti-road, anti-public & common good, and anti-Constitution. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'>Oh, and we can also add that he’s a voracious consumer of Fake News. Sad!<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'>If there are any reasonable people who haven’t yet realized the depth of betrayal of our district by local Republican party leadership, here’s a letter he recently wrote to a <a href="http://us10.campaign-archive2.com/?u=87dde331565b4cee6328a4a13&id=2c0bf8aa42&e=4950b149ab">constituent</a>:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><img border=0 width=584 height=361 id="Picture_x0020_1" src="cid:image001.png@01D2846C.190702F0"><span style='color:#44546A'><o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'>If it weren’t so serious, it would be funny, right? Here’s a man lamenting the loss of critical thinking skills who himself lacks the critical thinking skills to recognize he’s pushing fake news, for the love of God, and who is fine with gutting and dumbing down public education so our children will <b>never</b> develop the critical thinking skills he’s whining about.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'>And, all of this from a man who couldn’t critically think himself out of a wet paper bag. Sad!<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'>It’s no wonder intelligent life-long Republicans here in Latah County have been worried for quite a few years and have quit being “party” people with the spread of the rabid extremism that has infected the state and local Republican parties. Perhaps that exodus is a significant factor in the local Republican party not having a quality candidate to run for the senate in the last election.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'>Several weeks ago – after that first article – I heard rumors of a recall effort. Does anyone know anything more about that? If the local Republican Party lacks the ability to keep this horror in check or convince him to step down so someone not unhinged can step up to represent us, perhaps a recall is the way to go.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'>Saundra Lund<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'>Moscow, ID<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'>To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards out of men.<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'>~ Abraham Lincoln<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;color:#44546A'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div></body></html>