Think when it comes to science most people expect, and want, to be shown ISO symbols and not cup/saucer hybrids.
Comment on ‘Scientist’: the evolving story of a word by freeHat
↧
↧
Comment on ‘Scientist’: the evolving story of a word by fizzymagic
David Springer: Agreed.
Good science is the pursuit of truth, wherever it leads. There is no conflict with faith, unless it is a faith that needs God to be protected from the truth.
I don’t see climate alarmism as anti-Christian, although it is definitely supported by many people who are, in other respects, very anti-Christian. Christians believe in being good stewards of the Creation, which for at least some means that they take the threat of CAGW very seriously.
However, in the current politically polarized climate, I think the support for CAGW has a lot more to do with a desire for more power to the State than anything to do with Christianity.
↧
Comment on Disentangling forced from intrinsic climate variability by Rob Ellison
The ‘stadium wave’ is a metaphor for the connections between these network nodes – there is no physical wave as in a wave rolling across the oceans.
Try this one Ragnaar – for another Arctic mechanism.
↧
Comment on ‘Scientist’: the evolving story of a word by DaveW
I don’t know Mosher. They all looked like cups to me because where I grew up cups have one handle or are much deeper than wide (so the body acts as a handle). Bowls have no handles and you eat out of them with a spoon. Without handles, the entire top row would look like bowls to me. The rest are cups with or without handles.
Besides, isn’t ‘priming’ one of those phenomena that have been shown to be specious with more recent studies regressing to the mean?
↧
Comment on ‘Scientist’: the evolving story of a word by Stacey
I’m in moderation what have I done wrong?
↧
↧
Comment on ‘Scientist’: the evolving story of a word by Stacey
Dear David
Your are completely wrong about engineers not having degrees. In the uk it is necessary to become qualified unless you do so by a mature candidate route which is extremely onerous.
Maybe you are confusing engineers with mechanics electricians and other such fine occupations?
Regards
S
↧
Comment on ‘Scientist’: the evolving story of a word by genghiscunn
I’ve been in moderation a few times lately, after several years with nary a mod, defective intercept system I fear.
Faustino
↧
Comment on ‘Scientist’: the evolving story of a word by genghiscunn
There may be a terminological issue here. I take DS to mean what in the UK would be called a post-graduate or higher degree – a “graduate degree” I suspect in the US meaning one gained after graduation, e.g. a Masters or PhD. I further suspect that US engineers typically have a first degree, as they do in Australia (plus a requirement for continuing education to remain registered as an engineer). Faustino
↧
Comment on ‘Scientist’: the evolving story of a word by Edim
It’s complicated. In Germany and Austria (I think it’s similar in most of continental Europe) the engineer’s degree (Dipl.Ing.) is generally equivalent to a Master’s degree. The Bologna Process is an attempt to ensure comparability in the standards and quality of higher education qualifications.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engineer%27s_degree
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bologna_process
↧
↧
Comment on ‘Scientist’: the evolving story of a word by beththeserf
Stacey,
Do not succumb ter fear and guilt re bein’ in moderation-
probably a blip … Fear and guilt are emotional triggers used
in history re climate by shamen, ( likewise philosopher kings
on the hill, ) fer shaMANNian purposes of herd control and
benefit ter themselves.
Herewith a “THought fer Today” borrowed from the irreverant
kim ( borrowed in turn from Dylan Thomas.)
“Wage, wage war against
the lying and the fright.”
beth-the-serf.
* kim, where-r-u?
.
↧
Comment on Why scientists should talk to philosophers by Tom Fuller
We know that exactly how?
↧
Comment on Why scientists should talk to philosophers by Tom Fuller
Philosophy is more than a field of study and accrued knowledge. Like culture, it becomes a set of character traits we wear like comfortable clothes, informing our thoughts, reactions and other beliefs.
Investigating this second definition of philosophy might yield interesting results in the context of discussions on climate change.
↧
Comment on Understanding adjustments to temperature data by mwgrant
Fuggedaboutit.
↧
↧
Comment on Why scientists should talk to philosophers by Brandon Shollenberger
Because it’s a fundamental aspect of the theory. According to the theory, space and time came into existence along with the Big Bang. The “bang” described by the theory was not merely an explosion of matter. It was an explosion of space-time. If you rewound the space-time continuum to the point of the Big Bang, you wouldn’t be able to rewind any further because time didn’t exist before the Big Bang. Nothing did.
Of course, that’s only true if you accept the model behind the Big Bang theory as is. Some people prefer to expand upon it, coming up with theories for how an existence outside time would be possible, and how it could have existed before the Big Bang. Richard Dawkins did that. That’s funny because there is no basis for any such idea, so the only reason to believe it is blind faith. You can’t accept the Big Bang and believe space existed prior to it without your view being as faith-based as any religion.
Of course, you don’t have to accept the Big Bang model. A more sensible view some people advance is the Big Bang model is simply inaccurate as you rewind back to the singularity.
The silly thing is most people ask, “What came before the Big Bang?” because of religious contexts. The truth is physical reality must be a closed system. Closed systems cannot speak to things outside of themselves. That means science can never hope to explain how existence came to exist. Science, by definition, will always be left puzzled as to what was the “first cause.” That proves science, by its very nature, can never fill certain explanatory roles of religion. It doesn’t matter what you say about the Big Bang.
↧
Comment on Understanding adjustments to temperature data by Brandon Shollenberger
Uh… sure, mwgrant. You dredged up an issue days after it had passed, made several comments about me as a person while discussing it, and were completely wrong on the only point which mattered, but we can drop the entire thing without resolving anything.
Even though you were obviously wrong about what Carrick was talking about.
↧
Comment on Understanding adjustments to temperature data by Brandon Shollenberger
My <a href="http://judithcurry.com/2014/07/07/understanding-adjustments-to-temperature-data/#comment-608831" rel="nofollow">response</a> wound up in the wrong fork. It's funny really. When I participated in two lengthy forks about the same topic upthread, I didn't misplace a single comment.
Then, I got one simple fork here, and I apparently forgot how to find the right spot to reply.
↧
Comment on Why scientists should talk to philosophers by GiordyS
Since we’re on the topic, check this out: http://www.ted.com/talks/david_chalmers_how_do_you_explain_consciousness
↧
↧
Comment on ‘Scientist’: the evolving story of a word by stefanthedenier
Meteorology is a science; ''climatology'' is a religion / belief.
''researchers'' in the phony GLOBAL warming should stop hiding behind the phony ''Skeptics'' and see what the deniers have!
↧
Comment on ‘Scientist’: the evolving story of a word by stefanthedenier
WebHubTelescope (@WHUT) | said: ”The excess atmospheric CO2 does not get sequestered easily”
CORRECTION! The more CO2 is in the atmosphere – the MORE the rain washes of it into the ground and into the sea.,
↧
Comment on Why scientists should talk to philosophers by genghiscunn
“Of course, you don’t have to accept the Big Bang model.” Indeed, you can ignore it as having no bearing on how to lead a happy, harmonious life 13 billion (or whatever) years later. If there was a Big Bang start, did anything precede it? Don’t know, don’t care, no practical application.
↧
