Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Twitter
Support

 

Recent comments
Recent posts
Links

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

Powered by Squarespace
« Sceptics' new friends | Main | What is the Gaelic for "integrity"? »
Monday
Mar172014

Nurse flounders

Paul Nurse has taken to the pages of the Telegraph, although I have no idea why. He appears to have nothing to say of any importance and his analysis, such as it is, consists of platitudes. I relay the article's existence, dear reader, out of a sense of duty rather than because I think it's worth your time.

The evidence is becoming increasingly clear. However, not every question has yet been answered or every detail defined – for example, there are debates concerning the models used to predict the exact extent of global warming.

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (59)

I suspect he was told it was time to write something appropriate or he wasn't going to get his cocoa and chocolate digestive before beddy-byes - 8-))

Mar 17, 2014 at 9:39 PM | Unregistered Commenterdennis

I wish they'd deign to tell us just one piece of evidence. Not models, not natural warming, just evidence of manmade warming. As far as I can see it is merely evidence of the self-proclaimed expert witness - experts who have never predicted anything correctly yet.

Mar 17, 2014 at 9:46 PM | Unregistered CommenterJamesG

'Or Paul Ehrlich, who prophesied in the seventies that by the year 2000 environmental collapse would have reduced the British Isles to a stone age level of existence – and who last year was made a Fellow of the Royal Society by the surviving gibbering Neanderthals?'
Nicely put Geoff.

Mar 17, 2014 at 10:39 PM | Unregistered CommenterEddy

"The evidence is becoming increasingly clear."

Shouldn't it have been so *before* ruinously expensive policies were introduced?

Mar 17, 2014 at 10:40 PM | Unregistered CommenterGareth

I don't care too much anymore what the little gobshyte tells.
If he must appeal to logic howeve, I should say that decision theory never looks at the big risks standalone, but uses "expected values"= a combination or product of probability of these risks with their estimated damage. This allows to compare amongst other risks. Pascal's wager was fixed with that insight , like, 300y ago?
Investment policies should use modern logic / decision theory insights.
I'm sure "dave"s office table is full of that, lol.

Mar 17, 2014 at 11:13 PM | Unregistered Commenterptw

Gareth: It went from clear as mud to as clear as a slightly lighter form of mud. What are you complaining about?

Mar 17, 2014 at 11:47 PM | Registered CommenterRichard Drake

Sir Paul Nurse Jorrel thinks hes the humam version of Marlon Brando in the first and the best Superman film.

Mar 18, 2014 at 7:06 AM | Unregistered Commenterjamspid

..Grabbahman..

Can't fly (but first class) but saaaaaves the earth!!

Mar 18, 2014 at 7:51 PM | Unregistered Commenterptw

Richard Drake,

Nurse is promoting evidence based policy making ("So what is to be done now? The debate needs to move on and be more about what we are going to do next.") seemingly oblivious to the many policies we have already suffered before that apparently credible evidence was available. It is a dubious logic.

Mar 19, 2014 at 12:11 AM | Unregistered CommenterGareth

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):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>