Wednesday, August 07, 2013


NOAA Reminds Us That They Have Degenerated Into A Propaganda Wing Of The White House | Real Science
Disappearing at an unprecedented rate, means growing at an unprecedented rate since last summer.
NSIDC Using That New Boulder Measurement System | Real Science
NSIDC shows Arctic sea ice about 10% higher this year than last year, and dropping fast.
Satellite imagery shows that there is 50% more ice than last year (green area.)
DMI has this right. They show almost 50% more ice than last year, and dropping slowly
What are they smoking in Boulder?
If we can't even agree on how much ice was there yesterday, how do we know how much ice was there 100 or 1,000 years ago?

Terrifying Imagery Of The Santa Fe Drought | Real Science
The LA Times says that Santa Fe will never recover from this drought. Santa Fe has only had 26 rainy days since July 1.
Godwin's Law and Discussing Science | The Energy Collective
[Pielke Jr] The phrase “anti-science” is generally used as cudgel in policy debates to express one’s disagreement with the substantive claims of another. For example, if you think that genetically modified agricultural products present environmental risks, then not only can I express my disagreement with your opinion by citing mainstream or consensus views, but I can rhetorically try to place the entire establishment of science on my side by saying that your views are “anti-science.”

To some, those who express doubt, skepticism, or even openness to alternatives are not only wrong, but “anti-science.” One does not even have to express views that are counter to a consensus to earn the label “anti-science.” For expressing my views on the lack of a demonstrable relationship between human-caused climate change and disasters – which are peer reviewed, highly mainstream and consensual – I have been accused of spreading “anti-scientific – and anti-scientist — disinformation.” In a highly politicized debate, it is far easier to try to label an opponent’s views as contrary to the very idea of science than to engage with data and argument.

The phrase “anti-science” is meant to be a trump card in political debates, one that ends the conversation and defines one’s opponent as illegitimate, similar to the invocations of Nazis that motivated the coining of Godwin’s Law.

No comments: