SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Justin Gillis reports at the NYT that in the long-running political battles over climate change, the fight about what to call the various factions has been going on for a long time with people who reject the findings of climate science dismissed as “deniers” and “disinformers" and those who accept the science attacked as “alarmists” or “warmistas". The issue has recently taken a new turn, with a public appeal that has garnered 22,000 signatures asking the news media to abandon the most frequently used term for people who question climate science, “skeptic,” and call them “climate deniers” instead. The petition began with Mark B. Boslough, a physicist in New Mexico who grew increasingly annoyed by the term over several years. The phrase is wrong, says Boslough, because “these people do not embrace the scientific method.”
Last year, Boslough wrote a public letter on the issue, "Deniers are not Skeptics." and dozens of scientists and science advocates associated with the committee quickly signed it. According to Boslough real skepticism is summed up by a quote popularized by Carl Sagan, “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” "[Senator] Inhofe’s belief that global warming is “the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people” is an extraordinary claim indeed," says Boslough. "He has never been able to provide evidence for this vast alleged conspiracy. That alone should disqualify him from using the title skeptic."
(Score: 5, Funny) by aristarchus on Monday February 16 2015, @02:07AM
But before we do, take a look at John Oliver's take on the matter https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjuGCJJUGsg [youtube.com]
And I want to categorically deny that I ever denied that science was deniable, Because, it is, of course, if you try hard enough.
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Monday February 16 2015, @04:45AM
And I want to categorically deny that I ever denied that science was deniable, Because, it is, of course, if you try hard enough.
This should be obvious to anyone who with even a passing familiarity with the scientific method. If an idea, concept, hypothesis or theory isn't falsifiable, it's not science. Full stop. I'm not sure where you were going with that.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Monday February 16 2015, @05:17AM
Full stop. I'm not sure where you were going with that.
Right here. Thanks for getting it.
(Score: 2) by BasilBrush on Monday February 16 2015, @10:44AM
If an idea, concept, hypothesis or theory isn't falsifiable, it's not science. Full stop.
This is a denialist myth. It revolves around the false belief that Karl Popper's views on science define what science is.
Hurrah! Quoting works now!
(Score: 2, Funny) by khallow on Monday February 16 2015, @03:36PM
This is a denialist myth. It revolves around the false belief that Karl Popper's views on science define what science is.
Of course not. Popper's definition of science defines science. By definition.
(Score: 2) by BasilBrush on Monday February 16 2015, @04:41PM
So you believe the myth too.
Hurrah! Quoting works now!
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday February 16 2015, @07:20PM
(Score: 2) by wantkitteh on Monday February 16 2015, @10:29PM
The definition seems pretty good to me, although I'd never have used the word "falsifiable" no matter how correct it may be knowing that people with an irrational negative view of anything scientific would deliberately misunderstand the word and say he means that all science can be faked.
Amazing, something Khallow and I actually agree on - in other news, the biggest snowball fight in the history of existence has just broken out in the queue for admission to Hell. ;)
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Monday February 16 2015, @09:46PM
If an idea, concept, hypothesis or theory isn't falsifiable, it's not science. Full stop.
This is a denialist myth. It revolves around the false belief that Karl Popper's views on science define what science is.
I don't know (or particularly care) who this Karl Popper might be. Science is defined as a set of activities which hew to the scientific method [wikipedia.org] and has nothing to do with one's personal beliefs about anything, including AGCC.
For the record (and I've stated this before on SN) I am not a climate scientist, nor can I personally verify every measurement, calculation or experimental observation made by real climate scientists. At the same time, I've seen no evidence of any vast conspiracy on the part of climate scientists to create and promulgate false results. Nor can I fathom how thousands of people who don't even know each other could benefit from such a conspiracy.
As such, unless someone has some actual evidence, I will treat the idea of a vast conspiracy to falsely promote AGCC the same way I treat the idea of the International Jewish Conspiracy. That is, with derision and disbelief.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday February 16 2015, @05:02AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Monday February 16 2015, @05:12AM
I just wanna know, are we having fun yet! No one has even mentioned the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company that hired Kermit Roosevelt to overthrow the elected government of Iran so they could latter cause global warming! Thanks, BP!
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday February 16 2015, @05:16AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Tuesday February 17 2015, @04:35AM
As the Mighty Buzzard hisself has said, yes, this was fun. I am happy now that all the climate deniers have admitted that they are only deniers, that the scientific community once more emerged unscathed by the attacks of the unwashed (and ilnumerate) masses, and that once again not a single person has been willing to admit that they are being paid by Big Oil. All this bodes well for the future of our blessed Soylent News, which is people, and I look forward to many such flamefests in the future, no matter how warm.