Click images for more details



Recent posts
Recent comments

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
« Josh 72 | Main | Fox and Ward talk Nurse »

Der Spiegel on Lisbon

Gosselin reports the essence of a Der Spielgel article about the Lisbon conference, which is well worth a look.

Benny Peiser has posted a translation of the article here.

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (6)

Well, that climate scientists wouldn't support a very moderate proposal that all ought to be able to agree with is very telling. Jerome Ravetz proposed a final statement:

"Climate science would benefit if it adopted procedures for the collection of new records that are validated according to agreed standards."

No, they wouldn't buy that. So, when all's said and done, climate scientists have no interest in doing what is necessary to give their output credibility. Their results and publications are acceptable within their own little coterie, so that's just fine and dandy. OK, well let's just write off climate scientists as real scientists, and climate science as a proper science shall we - they are acting like a bunch of charlatans peddling pseudoscience.

Feb 2, 2011 at 5:41 PM | Unregistered CommenterScientistForTruth

Very unfortunate that Der Spiegel didn't make more of the "vested interests" in the Global Climate War. I know, there are far too many to list them all, but much of the commotion is a result of the overwhelming variety of "principles" involved in the fight. Were the matter strictly about the "science of climate" it would rarely make the back page of The Times. As it involves politics, economics, environmentalism, trade, energy, technology, taxes, and academia, (and probably 'religion' for some) the players on the field far outnumber the spectators in the stands.Ergo - if so many have a vested interest - it's Front Page News Everyday!!!

Feb 2, 2011 at 5:49 PM | Unregistered CommenterPascvaks

"they are acting like a bunch of charlatans peddling pseudoscience."

This is an act? ;^)

Feb 2, 2011 at 5:52 PM | Unregistered CommenterFrosty

I'm still very cautious about embracing postnormal science. I feel that it is dangerous to take one's eye off the boundary between what is evidential scientific advancement and what is scientific "agreement in principle".

PNS encourages fumbling confidently forward into the darkness by pretending to ourselves that we have a flashlight when we don't.

Feb 2, 2011 at 5:59 PM | Unregistered CommenterSimon Hopkinson

I don't think the 'battle' is being properly characterized. Its not a battle between Alarmists and Denialists. Its a battle between Theoretical Scientists (mostly academics) and Applied Scientists like engineers, statisticians and meteorologists.

Feb 2, 2011 at 7:08 PM | Unregistered Commentermpaul

mpaul, I agree wholeheartedly.

Feb 2, 2011 at 9:33 PM | Unregistered CommenterSimon Hopkinson

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>