Some Good Words...
A “view” differs significantly from a “view necessarily informed by evidence.” The problem with many climate-change naysayers is that they present their views as facts where they are not accountable to the evidence. They avoid having to address expert review. They dodge the systematic technical criticism that is essential to establishing scientific claims as trustworthy.
In this case, they have failed to persuade the scientific community. Instead, they appeal directly to nonexpert citizens with shards of evidence or emotional pleas, trying to short-circuit the process of validation.
It's always about the short circuiting, isn't it? Why?
I think it comes back to that insecurity/inferiority complex thing again. They just can't stand the fact that there are leaders in our country that are smarter and more successful than they are. So, let's tear them down...somehow...someway...
Pretty fucking sad.
2 comments:
Hey that's funny, you posting about science when your co-blogger is denying the science on GMOs.
Also, I think we have a good analysis on why M loves Obama so much. It concludes:
That statement would have been far more honest, far more self-reflective, and far less cynical. Which may explain why there was no chance Mr. Obama would utter these words.
It’s long past time Mr. Obama get off his high horse. Vanity is difficult to take in anyone–but it’s especially difficult to take in a person of such staggering incompetence and intellectual shallowness.
… they present their views as facts where they are not accountable to the evidence.
You mean like this?
On your side: Bill Nye
The evidence: Jackson Hole web cam
Pure projection, as usual.
Post a Comment