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, Touché) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday February 16 2015, @04:17AM
Recheck your scientific method. I don't see an experiment in there proving diddly.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 16 2015, @06:05AM
Yeah, but its an elegant theory, therefore we do not need to perform these 'experiments'.
Nor confirm the experiments which disprove this elegant theory.
Infact, if a scientist shows me his working out, method and references, I'll infact attack the man - because he must have been given money for his anti-science research by dirty oil... those killers of unborn children ;)
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 16 2015, @12:53PM
It is called a natural experiment. If you were to have a scientific background and not just a code monkey degree, or even scientific literacy, you would know that.
(Score: 1) by wantkitteh on Monday February 16 2015, @10:32PM
Never heard of an observation study?
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday February 16 2015, @10:48PM
Oh, sure, and it's dandy for situations where you cannot experimentally test even your tools. This is not such a place.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by wantkitteh on Tuesday February 17 2015, @12:56AM
...and proof by repeated assertion is just as unwelcome here. Get a real argument and present your case or STFU.