I was referring to the real Willard, Planning One:
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/quine/
I’m not a complete Quinean. (His idea of a naturalized epistemology has merits, and holism, in the end, wins.) It just so happens that I needed an email address, so I took the first sentence of his Word and Object.
Language is a social art.
[…] of what is going on,” Judith Curry, a climate science professor at Georgia Tech, wrote in a response to the […]
The main difference between ‘scientific certainty’ and ‘certainty’ in general is that scientists are not expected to run away from the ethical, moral and practical principles underlying the use of the scientific method; and, its the embrace of the scientific method that gives scientists’ findings any credibility.
Andrew Revkin (NY Times) has an article where Bill McKibben and Anthony Watts sat down and chatted for 2 hours (and didn’t kill each other).
They found some common ground on air and water pollution.
They both have solar panels on their homes (for very different reasons).
Even here at CE one can see glimpses of trying to find Common Ground (e.g. Fast Mitigation of CFCs, Methane, Black Carbon, Smog).
If you criticize climate ‘science’ in the blogs you’re told that it isn’t peer reviewed and thus safely ignored. If you criticize it in the journals then you are told that it belongs in the blogs.
And if you point out the sophistry of the Climate Faithful you only said what everyone already knows. <¿<
Thanks for posting. I bought a couple of coffee mugs to help support Steyn.
This is a very important case that hopefully Steyn will be able to see through to the end.
Yeah right! Now I understand better why Monfort loves you so much.
Did McKibben really believe that Watts was for air and water pollution? This is what happens when you drink too much of your own kool-aid.
Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to decieve…
Former CEA chair Christina Romer made her first academic splash by showing that the apparent lower volatility of U.S. economic output prior to the establishment of the Federal Reserve was largely an artifact of data weaknesses in the earlier period. I’m not sure what later workers in the field concluded about all that, but it was a remarkable case of findings over philosophy given her pro-demand-management views.
Willard,
FWIW I was a bit surprised to see the Skeptic organization make a pronouncement on AGW. It seemed outside of their established genre.
Genre is a slippery thing.
The idea the author is getting at (that any long term prediction, will probably prove wrong) was captured pretty well (especially as it relates to the global warming debate) by, among others, Michael Crichton. The genius of President Bush’s “thousand points of light,” is that it celebrates the enduring strength free individuals over the deceivingly simple-minded “certainty” of a state’s single torch of truth.
You should try to make yourself useful, willy.
Which drawing board at Northrop, Steven? Tell us about it.
Justin
Prior to 2003 there was a move in the US Army to retire the tank; the brass envisioned a system-of-systems that could survive with sensors and speed, no need for heavy armor and big guns. The Iraq war of 2003-11 changed that thinking; the troops on the ground adapted and found the tank very useful for urban warfare.
Richard
Yes micro; Kerry’s comment implies how the 21st century is a civilized century of cooperative advancement, an enlightened century. That’s why he expressed his indignation towards Russia the way he did. It blind sighted him, that’s not the way 21st century countries act. And it was a veiled redline. “Get with the program dude!”
The link: Wattsupwiththat.com
Excellent thoughts; coming from the intelligence community (long retired) I agree completely. It is just damn hard to predict the future and cover all outlying effects. And my BS detector goes off multiple times from the AGW crowd’s alarmist statements. So I came here to learn.
So why not go into the prediction business yourself? No doubt some Tech grad student would love to work on a “revised” program with variables more in line with your thinking. And publish the key variables for debate here. You could try crowd-sourcing the funding. With all the shots you’ve already taken, a few more shouldn’t make a difference, I hope.
Tom H, class ’74
[…] of what is going on,” Judith Curry, a climate science professor at Georgia Tech, wrote in a response to the […]
It blind sighted him
And this is the biggest problem we face, the world is full of 12th, 19th and 20th century actors who laugh at such fools who are running the country now.
Just like they do.
