Climate debate - is it about science, or values?

Please. Your argument from Schmidt and astrophysics ignorance was already looked at here; the short version is that they are very specious reasons to presume all the climate scientists have things completely wrong. Particularly since you have made it clear you don’t really know what evidence the IPCC conclusions are based on, and even for astrophysics are willing to suppose problems that aren’t real, instead accepting sites whose idea of challenging dogma is pretending there’s no evidence for time dilation.

People have been listening to whistleblowers and critics in this field. The problem is that they have very little else to offer. You can easily see it in the case of Mann; both his work and conduct have been criticized time and again, and they have been investigated in detail, and exonerated because his data holds up and he hasn’t actually done anything wrong.

Of course you can simply take that as proof there’s a conspiracy, instead of considering the possibility the critics might not have been right. Never mind the chance that they’re driven by ideology and financial interests, the very things that Schmidt is warning about…wait, went through that before too.

4 Likes