SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - View Single Post

Skybird · 09-03-19, 06:59 AM

Has it? It has always been "confirmed" by the same campers, and objecitng data and models are actively being oppressed.

It seems you miss the main implication of all this. The perception and debate is highly biased and is being tuned.

The court certainly did not buy Mann's excuses why he refuses to release his raw data. But that would be what science does: rechecking claims, models, theories and data. since Mann has always refused to release his raw data, it cannot be rechecked: it cannot be confirmed or falsified. In other words: from a strictly methodological point of view, Mann's statements are just claims, nothing mre.

He would not be the first prominent scientist forging data or theories. There have been quite some highly prolific scandals of this kind in the history of science.

As I pointed out, there are very strong financial and economic interests in having only this wanted version of the narraiton told in public, and staying silent on what contradicts the "official" version. The IPCC in my eyes has lost any trustworthiness and credibility, there have eben more scandals about it and dubious figures at its helm than I have kept track of.

09-03-19, 06:59 AM	#5
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,616 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	Has it? It has always been "confirmed" by the same campers, and objecitng data and models are actively being oppressed. It seems you miss the main implication of all this. The perception and debate is highly biased and is being tuned. The court certainly did not buy Mann's excuses why he refuses to release his raw data. But that would be what science does: rechecking claims, models, theories and data. since Mann has always refused to release his raw data, it cannot be rechecked: it cannot be confirmed or falsified. In other words: from a strictly methodological point of view, Mann's statements are just claims, nothing mre. He would not be the first prominent scientist forging data or theories. There have been quite some highly prolific scandals of this kind in the history of science. As I pointed out, there are very strong financial and economic interests in having only this wanted version of the narraiton told in public, and staying silent on what contradicts the "official" version. The IPCC in my eyes has lost any trustworthiness and credibility, there have eben more scandals about it and dubious figures at its helm than I have kept track of. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.