The Limits To Skepticism

jamie found a long and painstaking piece up at The Economist asking and provisionally answering the question: "Does the spirit of scientific scepticism really require that I remain forever open-minded to denialist humbug until it's shown to be wrong?" The author, who is not named, spent several hours picking apart the arguments of one Willis Eschenbach, AGW denialist, who on Dec. 8 published what he called the "smoking gun" — it was supposed to prove that the adjustments climate scientists make to historical temperature records are arbitrary to the point of intentional manipulation. The conclusion: "[H]ere's my solution to this problem: this is why we have peer review. Average guys with websites can do a lot of amazing things. One thing they cannot do is reveal statistical manipulation in climate-change studies that require a PhD in a related field to understand. So for the time being, my response to any and all further 'smoking gun' claims begins with: show me the peer-reviewed journal article demonstrating the error here. Otherwise, you're a crank and this is not a story. And then I'll probably go ahead and try to investigate the claim and write a blog post about it, because that's my job. Oh, and by the way: October was the hottest month on record in Darwin, Australia."

kdawson is a douche

[Anonymous Coward]

Round here, we don't appeal to authority as a way to argue your point, and we should not degrade people asking legit questions by calling them "denialist" - as if they "deny" for living or something.

Except maybe those FSM loons, but that's cthulu's business to take care of.

Re:like trying to offer proof to a Birther

[MindlessAutomata]

Oh, please, you liberal god-hating scumbag, Obama has yet to provide proof that his birth certificate is not a clever hologram. Until then, I'll just continue believing he was born in Indonesia/Kenya.

Re:Enter the closed loop you cannot enter.

[Anonymous Coward]

You will find other interesting stuff on this website, that many if not most on Slashdot would disagree with.

I completely disagree with their paper on deamidation of proteins [oism.org]! Proteins were given to us by God and if he had intended them to be deamidified, he'd have deamidificated them Himself! We must stop these blasphemous acts by those who would play "god"!

Proof by assertion

[MillionthMonkey]

No, "they" are ridiculed because of the absence of anything approximating proof of the hypothesis of anthropogenic global warming.

Except the absence you assert exists, does not, in fact, exist. There is a total absence of the "absence of anything approximating proof of the hypothesis of anthropogenic global warming".

...the absence of proof elevates the value of ridicule from mere fun to pivotal.

Since you have proven nothing by your silly assertions it is pivotal that I call you a goofball.

Re:Pitchforks and torches

[aplusjimages]

This is what I've been telling people for years. I would also like to add that the smog in L.A. is also cyclical and natural, as well as the bad air in China. None of it is man made except for the lies that surround it. There's no way humans could pollute a planet let alone a city.

Re:like trying to offer proof to a Birther

[mutube]

Greenland used to be GREEN with vegetation. It is presently covered in ice. What does that tell you?

That you're an idiot [wikipedia.org]?

Re:I am very sceptical...

[lennier]

"Would you be wasting energy running your coal powered computer to read this message? "

Yes, my Babbage IV does run on coal, but only until my Zeppelin gets to cruising height to capture the aetheric vortex energies broadcast from Her Majesty's Venusian Colonisation Fleet.

What the deuce, I just received a telekinetograph. The blasted Mekon's up in arms again about something new. Frightfully sorry old chap, I'll have to kick you off the blower and go show those benighted ultraterrestrials the colour of our steel. Huzzah!