Is economics a science? I don’t think so. So the debate whether it adheres to the scientific method is moot.
Comment on The adversarial method versus Feynman integrity by jacobress
↧
↧
Comment on The adversarial method versus Feynman integrity by Richard Tol (@RichardTol)
@all
Arthur is right that Romer primarily refers to a debate within theoretical economics (a debate that he started, by the way) and a particular style of theorizing.
Judy is not wrong, though, to draw parallels to climate research. Economics as a model for climate research is, like all models, wrong — but it can be useful.
↧
Comment on Mark Steyn’s new book on Michael Mann by Mark Silbert
Good post on a really interesting book.
The section on Judith Curry was particularly damning of Mann.
The section citing Mann’s defenders was hilarious.
I hope Mark Steyn makes enough money on the book and the other stuff he sells at “Steyn Online” to pay his lawyers defending him in a lawsuit that should have been thrown out by the court on day 1.
↧
Comment on The adversarial method versus Feynman integrity by peter3172
VTG, being accused of doing something and actually doing it are often two different things as well.
↧
Comment on Mark Steyn’s new book on Michael Mann by Kevin Lohse
Thanks for that, Dr. Curry. Your position, of separating Michael Mann’s pseudo-scientific behaviours from the science of AGW, is defensible, but it remains to be seen whether Mann’s apologists and acolytes, not one of whom has supported Mann with an amicus brief, are capable of of such nuances. This site could get very busy over the next few days, I’ve ordered in the popcorn.
↧
↧
Comment on The adversarial method versus Feynman integrity by verytallguy
Peter.
OK, so let’s see if I’ve got this right. Name calling is fine as long as it’s accurate. Judith is the only person who is accurate with her name-calling, and everyone else is equivalent to a racist or anti-semite.
Do I have it now?
↧
Comment on Mark Steyn’s new book on Michael Mann by andymay2014
“It is a sad state of affairs for climate science that this book had to be written (it was brought on by Michael Mann’s lawsuit – without the lawsuit, Steyn obviously wouldn’t have bothered). At a time when the U.S. and the world’s nations are trying to put together an agreement to tackle climate change (for better or for worse), Steyn’s book reminds everyone of Climategate, why the public doesn’t trust climate scientists and aren’t buying their ‘consensus.”
How true. I see why Steyn wrote the book. It needed to be done. But, I’m sad because Professor Mann’s irresponsible, dishonest and unethical actions reflect on all of the scientific community.
↧
Comment on Mark Steyn’s new book on Michael Mann by Michael
Just when you think Judith might be easing off on the Mann obsession…..
↧
Comment on Carly Fiorina hits the ‘sweet spot’ on climate change by Don Monfort
For those who don’t work and pay taxes, all kind of stuff is free here Tony. Obama phones, school lunches (and they say you can’t get a free lunch), sex change operations, crummy housing in an exciting war zone, methadone, you can sell your EBT card for cash and buy whatever street candy you prefer, guns, a hoopty. Generations of so-called beneficiaries are degraded, demoralized and doomed to the underclass life, but what can you do. I been through that. Grew up on welfare in a gubmint project in Detroit. If I hadn’t had the advantage of being tall, white and handsome odds are I would still be there.
↧
↧
Comment on Mark Steyn’s new book on Michael Mann by Kevin Lohse
Can’t you do any better than play the person, not the message? Most unimpressive to any but Alinsky followers.
↧
Comment on The adversarial method versus Feynman integrity by peter3172
It’s not name-calling, end of!
↧
Comment on Mark Steyn’s new book on Michael Mann by David Wojick
Unfortunately, fraud is a strong and libelous claim. None of these quotes support it. Mann is a stubborn and unpleasant person but that is not a crime, as fraud is.
↧
Comment on Mark Steyn’s new book on Michael Mann by Michael
A book of self-servng quote mining from a gutter journalist, trying to save his own skin.
Judith debases herself by rolling around in this sh!t.
Imagine what an interesting book we would have by quote mining comments about Judith Curry, taken from private/stolen emails?
What a hoot that would be!
↧
↧
Comment on Mark Steyn’s new book on Michael Mann by curryja
yeah, stuff from sou, michael tobis, anna haynes, etc – sure to be a bestseller. go for it.
↧
Comment on The adversarial method versus Feynman integrity by rpielke
Joshua – I never said Gavin is a “bad” person or even doing “bad science”. What he (and others) are doing is pushing their agendas without properly debating/discussing other viewpoints. In his case, he is using his pulpit as Director of GISS to enforce an orthodoxy rather than permit honest, open assessments of the diversity of viewpoints on the climate issue.
I have tried to interact with Gavin for over a decade. Search my weblog and you will see many attempts and a few modest successes in the past.
https://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/?s=gavin+schmidt
However, over the past several years (including during my service on the AGU Committee on Climate Change), he has become even more intolerant of alternative views. He finds my questions at WUWT “dull” which is an odd response from a scientist.
Try answering them yourself and present your views on them if you are, yourself, open to discussion.
He is certainly not the only one who is using their positions to enforce a particular viewpoint on the climate issue. The term “climate huckster” fits with Gavin Schmidt’s role. He
“serves biased interests, using pushy or showy tactics.”
In my view this is sad, as if he would engage everyone might learn something.
My recent experience interacting with Ken Rice at ATTP is an example of how positive, constructive outcomes can be achieved.
Clearly, and unfortunately, Gavin Schmidt is not interested in constructive debate/discussion who those who differ in the viewpoints on the climate issue from his perspective.
Roger Sr.
↧
Comment on Mark Steyn’s new book on Michael Mann by nickels
Love it.
Stern gets it. “Watermelons”.
http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/steyn-environmentalists-are-communists
↧
Comment on Mark Steyn’s new book on Michael Mann by Joshua
==> “There is much wit and plenty of zingers…”
What is the line of differentiation between “wit” and “zingers,” and smears in your book, Judith?
Seems to me that your line of differentiation traces back to the side of the climate wars from which the comments originate.
↧
↧
Comment on The adversarial method versus Feynman integrity by Bad Andrew
“Clearly, and unfortunately, Gavin Schmidt is not interested in constructive debate/discussion”
Neither is Joshua.
Andrew
↧
Comment on Mark Steyn’s new book on Michael Mann by Michael
Yes, Judith, let’s play the Steyn game;
Joe Romm, physicist, and former lecture circuit colleague of Curry said;
“Dr. Judith Curry, … has now taken the crown as the most debunked person on the science blogosphere, which is quite a feat considering the competition. But she invites debunking by her tendency to make scientific-sounding pronouncements without having actually read the relevant literature, and then backing down the minute she is challenged by someone who has or who has actually contributed to that literature.”
and Stats expert James Annan on Curry’s attempt to talk up some wrong-headed stats aproach;
“(S)He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense“, … “Judith, when you find that everyone else is out of step, it is probably appropriate to worry about the intellectual foundations underpinning your whole argument. But somehow I don’t think you meant that ”
Yep, that’s how we play the Steyn game.
Silly jello flinging, but Judith wants to play jello-flinging……
↧
Comment on Mark Steyn’s new book on Michael Mann by captdallas2 0.8 +/- 0.3
"Atte Korhola: Another example is a study recently published in the prestigious journal Science. Proxies have been included selectively, they have been digested, manipulated, filtered, and combined – <b>for example, data collected from Finland in the past by my own colleagues has even been turned upside down such that the warm periods become cold and vice versa. Normally, this would be considered as a scientific forgery, which has serious consequences.</b>"
"Forgery. The creation of a false written document or alteration of a genuine one, <b>with the intent to defraud</b>. Forgery consists of filling in blanks on a document containing a genuine signature, or materially altering or erasing an existing instrument."
All that is needed is intent.
"I gave up on Judith Curry a while ago. I don’t know what she think’s she’s doing, but its not helping <b>the cause</b>." Michael Mann climategate 2.0
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
